Unit Increase - 124

[jskains]

So specifically the focus I have seen is the slow increase in 2011 of only 124 units, the lowest since 94 sometime in the early 2000's, but a massive increase in Stakes.

Anyone have specific thoughts on why our unit increase was so low? A glitch or a longer trend?

JMS

[LeSellers]

There is no differentiation between a branch and a ward in the designation "unit". Branches, which do not require stakes as they reach a certain number within a stake, become wards, which do.

Our stake has 13 wards (a condition that occurred 50 years ago in my "home stake" in Rose Park, Salt Lake, Utah) and the maximum number in a stake should be 12. It took a while to rectify that because we needed a new building, among other limitations. I do not doubt that we'll see another stake here in the next year or so. It is probable that there will be two new stakes formed near us because another stake also has this same growing pain. We don't need any new wards, we have those; we need one or more new stakes.

Lehi

Edited April 2, 2012 by LeSellers

[jskains]

I guess the problem is that 280,000 new people to 124 new units is about 2000+ people per new unit.

Where are all those people?

And I do agree that when we had 5 million people in the 80's, they had 125,000 new kids on record and here we are in 2011 with supposedly 14 million people, but produced even less at 119,000.

JMS

[BCSpace]

Our Stake has 8 wards and two branches. A decade ago it was 7 wards only. The Stake boundaries themselves have not changed in that time.

[Nofear]

I guess the problem is that 280,000 new people to 124 new units is about 2000+ people per new unit.

Where are all those people?

And I do agree that when we had 5 million people in the 80's, they had 125,000 new kids on record and here we are in 2011 with supposedly 14 million people, but produced even less at 119,000.

You're math should include the mortality rate as well (which, in the US is a little over half the birth rate). On the assumption that your numbers/calculations are essentially correct it would be closer to 1000+ members per new unit. Given our retention rates, that sounds roughly right.

[cinepro]

I guess the problem is that 280,000 new people to 124 new units is about 2000+ people per new unit.

Where are all those people?

And I do agree that when we had 5 million people in the 80's, they had 125,000 new kids on record and here we are in 2011 with supposedly 14 million people, but produced even less at 119,000.

JMS

This is why I don't think the Church should release membership statistics. They only give fodder for the secular mathists to criticize the Church.

Church growth is about faith, not numbers.

Edited April 2, 2012 by cinepro

[jskains]

This is why I don't think the Church should release membership statistics. They only give fodder for the secular mathists to criticize the Church.

Church growth is about faith, not numbers.

But if you don't, critics will claim we are hiding something.

JMS

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

So specifically the focus I have seen is the slow increase in 2011 of only 124 units, the lowest since 94 sometime in the early 2000's, but a massive increase in Stakes.

Anyone have specific thoughts on why our unit increase was so low? A glitch or a longer trend?

JMS

I am not surprised, this will continue. "Many are called but few are chosen, and why are they not chosen? Because their hearts are set upon the vain things of this world."

[blackstrap]

I am not surprised, this will continue. "Many are called but few are chosen, and why are they not chosen? Because their hearts are set upon the vain things of this world."

There are quite a few new gods to worship.Many have a name that begins with i.

[jskains]

Definitely something going on. Here in Orem, there are a lot more non-LDS than people claimed. At the local Lowes here, hardly anyone is LDS if any.

JMS

[Analytics]

Definitely something going on. Here in Orem, there are a lot more non-LDS than people claimed. At the local Lowes here, hardly anyone is LDS if any.

JMS

What I generally hear is that the Church claims 70% of Utahn's are on the roles (uhh, I mean "rolls"). In contrast, when pollsters ask Utahns what their religion is, only about 50% say they are Latter-day Saints. That implies that 25% to 30% of Utah members don't self-identify as members.

[jskains]

What I generally hear is that the Church claims 70% of Utahn's are on the roles (uhh, I mean "rolls"). In contrast, when pollsters ask Utahns what their religion is, only about 50% say they are Latter-day Saints. That implies that 25% to 30% of Utah members don't self-identify as members.

58%, but yes.

However, theoretically Utah County has the highest as LDS families go south to avoid the antagonism in SLC area.

JMS

[rongo]

Part of this, too, is the Church's trend to purposely slow the creation of new units. The watch-word is "real growth" vs. apparent growth, and the Church is focusing on real growth and not getting carried away as much by heady giddiness about Rodney Starks' predictions. So, wards are getting bigger and allowed to bust at the seams more until being divided.

There's a financial aspect as well: this slowing also slows the building of new buildings. While the Church is in a healthy financial state, this is in part because of its prudence, wisdom and caution. In these tough economic times, it's a good idea to only build new buildings when you absolutely have to.

[Thinking]

The watch-word is "real growth" vs. apparent growth, and the Church is focusing on real growth and not getting carried away as much by heady giddiness about Rodney Starks' predictions.

If the Church was focusing on real growth it would release attendance numbers.

As it is, the Church releases the numbers which are PR+.

For example, the number of members is released, but not how many actually attend.

The amount of humanitarian donations is released, but not the amount of money which is received by the Church.

Edited April 4, 2012 by Thinking

[TAK]

"we had 5 million people in the 80's, they had 125,000 new kids on record and here we are in 2011 with supposedly 14 million people, but produced even less at 119,000."

Interesting..

[ebeddoulos]

In the past five years I've attended church in three different buildings, was a member of three different wards and two different stakes. Sacrament meeting is again filling our chapel, overflow and the cultural hall. Our Primary is divided into a junior and senior and our Young mens/womens programs are quite full as well so I am sure that accounts for a goodly share of the growth. People are beginning to talk about a ward division but that will require yet another building to be built as all the buildings have at least three wards in them now. So in the mean-time I guess we shall just sit a bit closer to our neighbors.

[Darth_Bill]

My stake has shrunk dramatically, so I guess it depends on where you live. When the stake pres announced that our closing one ward was "just how the church grows" I knew I was in some weird echo chamber. That's just Illinois I guess, because every one else here have buildings ready to burst.

Edited April 6, 2012 by Darth_Bill

[cinepro]

My stake has shrunk dramatically, so I guess it depends on where you live. When the stake pres announced that our closing one ward was "just how the church grows" I knew I was in some weird echo chamber. That's just Illinois I guess, because every one else here have buildings ready to burst.

I've noticed a weird trend where every ward I move into grows, and every ward I move out of shrinks.

[Saints Alive]

I've noticed a weird trend where every ward I move into grows, and every ward I move out of shrinks.

Me too! Although generally its only by a couple of members in each instance

[BCSpace]

For handy reference:

2011 (April) 2010 (April) Change

Stakes 2,946 2,896 +50

Missions 340 340 0

Districts 608 614 -6

Wards and Branches 28,784 28,660 +124

Total Membership 14,441,346 14,131,467 +309,879

New Children of Record 119,917 120,528 -611

Converts Baptized 281,312 272,814 +8498

Full-Time Missionaries 55,410 52,225 +3185

Church-Service Missionaries 22,299 20,813 +1486

Temples 2011

Temples Dedicated during 2011 (San Salvador El Salvador and Quetzaltenango Guatemala) 2

Temples Rededicated during 2011 (Atlanta Georgia) 1

Temples in Operation 136

Temples 2010

Four temples were dedicated during the year: the Vancouver British Columbia Temple in Canada; The Gila Valley Arizona Temple in the United States; the Cebu City Philippines Temple; and the Kyiv Ukraine Temple.

The Laie Hawaii Temple in the United States was rededicated in 2010.

The total number of temples in operation throughout the world was 134

http://www.lds.org/g...t-2011?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/g...t-2010?lang=eng

Data hand calculated and hand entered so please check. Perhaps I will start a spreadsheet of my own.

Edit: I can't seem to preserve a proper spacing between columns.

Edited April 7, 2012 by BCSpace

[BCSpace]

If the Church was focusing on real growth it would release attendance numbers.

As it is, the Church releases the numbers which are PR+.

That is correct. It is well known among us that (in the USA) attendance is ~50% and ~33% in terms of TR/Tithe paying. As for not drawing attention to it, I think it's a wise move as critics are eager to create a dishonest stumbling block that doesn't take recovery and agency into account. Individuals in their various wards can sense by participation, home teaching (or lack thereof), and leadership positions what the numbers are.