"the Church Has Never Been Stronger" -- Elder Cook

[Teancum]

I was once a raging, evangelizing atheist, spreading the gospel of despair and hopelessness with missionary zeal. I enjoyed trying to shake the faith of those who foolishly believed in the fantasy of God. Madeline Murray O'Hair was my hero. I thought believers were wishful thinking suckers who lacked the courage to admit to themselves that life and existence are ultimately meaningless.  Nihilism was my creed. So I'm very well acquainted with the "other side" and know from personal experience that believing in nothing stinks. But knowing what I went through, i truly hope you'll emerge out of the hopelessness of unbelief and the improbable notion that the miracle existence is nothing more than an accident without purpose, rhyme nor reason.

Thank you for sharing that you have seen the other side. I am not hopeless at all. But I am a skeptical seeker of truth and right now I don't think the LDS church Is what it claims. But I am still open to returning to that belief.

[Tacenda]

Del

Edited April 9, 2015 by Tacenda

[sanfran1976]

My prediction is this will continue.  If the world truly is more wicked today than in the days of Noah and Noah had a hard time getting the people to convert, we should also expect the same or worse.  The Lord said in the 1830s that the field was white and ready to be harvested.  I think the field has turned brown and dried out.  Now it is ready to be burned.

 

So your conclusion is that there are fewer LDS converts because us modern people are wicked? That's one take. Another take is that there are fewer LDS converts because the information age has revealed JS to be a polyandrous con-man and BY to be a racist with a rather blasphemous take on theology. *This* is what keeps people from converting and what compels them to leave the LDS church, not their own personal wickedness. May I suggest you stop looking down on us non-Mormons and start looking down on your wicked founders? (Frankly, your field metaphor alone seems racist.)

[teddyaware]

So your conclusion is that there are fewer LDS converts because us modern people are wicked? That's one take. Another take is that there are fewer LDS converts because the information age has revealed JS to be a polyandrous con-man and BY to be a racist with a rather blasphemous take on theology. *This* is what keeps people from converting and what compels them to leave the LDS church, not their own personal wickedness. May I suggest you stop looking down on us non-Mormons and start looking down on your wicked founders? (Frankly, your field metaphor alone seems racist.)

 

The"field metaphor" was not Carbon Dioxide's. It was Jesus Christ in the New Testament who first used that metaphorical expression with regard to missionary work.  And with that last comment you reveal you are a presumptuous, rash and unfair critic. You surely knew hastily leveling a charge of racist motivation in this day and age is something that can be extremely destructive, yet you went ahead and did it anyway,

 

The fact that most anti-Mormons immediately embrace anything and everything that puts the LDS Church in a negative light, whether true or not -- the disparaging negativity of a point being more important than its truthfulness -- is one reason why I joined the Church even with a good knowledge of its past history. I soon came to realize most of the Church's critics were just plain old nasty, belligerent and dishonest people, at least when it comes to discussing Mormonism. By hastily going a bridge to far in your response (I guess you just couldn't help yourself spewing an uncalled for and totally unjustified race-baiting gibe), you've succeeded in diluting down your credibility and apparent sense of fair play on this board. Congratulations! 

Edited April 9, 2015 by teddyaware

[CV75]

It's impossible to eradicate the challenges.  Certainly not part of the plan.  

But you are saying that "there are many who have been thrust into faith challenges by the very content of the essays," as if the challenges are not part of the plan. Perhaps i misunderstood.

 

RE: "the very content of the essays," even Paul preached “Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness…” (1 Corinthians 1;23). So of course the content of the essays would elicit a similar reaction from some people, not matter how they align with a standard of excellence in expert essay-writing.

Edited April 9, 2015 by CV75

[rockpond]

But you are saying that "there are many who have been thrust into faith challenges by the very content of the essays," as if the challenges are not part of the plan. Perhaps i misunderstood.

 

RE: "the very content of the essays," even Paul preached “Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness…” (1 Corinthians 1;23). So of course the content of the essays would elicit a similar reaction from some people, not matter how they align with a standard of excellence in expert essay-writing.

 

Well, I understood the point of the gospel topics essays to be a counter to what is perceived as misinformation or incomplete information that members and investigators were finding online.

 

Recognizing that today so much information about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints can be obtained from questionable and often inaccurate sources, officials of the Church began in 2013 to publish straightforward, in-depth essays on a number of topics. The purpose of these essays has been to gather accurate information from many different sources and publications and place it in the Gospel Topics section of LDS.org, where the material can more easily be accessed and studied by Church members and other interested parties.

 

Media reports have at times offered inaccurate or distorted analyses of some of these essays. We urge all to read the essays as written rather than relying on the characterization of their content by others.  (From LDS.org)

 

Given that objective, I assume that the hope is that the essays would keep members in the church rather than leading them out... that the content would help resolve challenges to faith rather than create them.

[Hestia]

Sanfran is banned from this topic.

[cinepro]

I gather you know Elder Cook personally and thus are able to make this kind of character judgement?

 

Well, not me personally, but the citizens of Marin County have been benefiting from his legal prowess for over 20 years now.  I generally hold the leaders of the Church* in high regard, but there are exceptions.

 

But that is neither here nor there regarding his claim about "church strength".  I understand a GC talk isn't the venue to rattle off statistics, but if Church leaders are going to introduce the number of people leaving as a valid concern for the Church members in general, then they should publish the numbers. 

 

 

*and lawyers, of which my dad is one

Edited April 9, 2015 by cinepro

[cinepro]

It's an indicator, because the presence of a temple is not supported by sheer membership numbers, but rather, the number of people who are eligible for a temple recommend.

 

Ergo, more temples indicate more people who meet the requirements for temple worship. That is to say, more people who meet the requirements of faithfulness and devotion. That's the real measure of Church strength.

 

I'm not sure I understand.  Since 1995, the Church has built or announced 10 Temples in Utah, which more than doubles the 7 that were built before 1995. 

 

Granted, the previous Temple had been completed in 1981, but do the number of Temples really indicate a commensurate increase in recommend holders? 

 

Utah population increased from ~2M in 1995 to ~3M in 2015, and the percentage of the population being LDS seems to hold steady at about 60%, so in this case, I'm not sure Temples are an explicit indicator of commensurate Church growth (or strength).   There is probably some increase, but I imagine the number of recommend holders/Temple has decreased drastically over the past 25 years.    There also seems to be a strong desire to shorten the distance members have to drive to get to the Temple, which is fine, but isn't necessarily directly related to Church growth.

Edited April 9, 2015 by cinepro

[Buckeye]

I'm not sure I understand.  Since 1995, the Church has built or announced 10 Temples in Utah, which more than doubles the 7 that were built before 1995. 

 

Granted, the previous Temple had been completed in 1981, but do the number of Temples really indicate a commensurate increase in recommend holders? 

 

Utah population increased from ~2M in 1995 to ~3M in 2015, and the percentage of the population being LDS seems to hold steady at about 60%, so in this case, I'm not sure Temples are an explicit indicator of commensurate Church growth (or strength).   There is probably some increase, but I imagine the number of recommend holders/Temple has decreased drastically over the past 25 years.    There also seems to be a strong desire to shorten the distance members have to drive to get to the Temple, which is fine, but isn't necessarily directly related to Church growth.

 

Good points.

 

One other consideration. In my stake there has been a recent push for all youth 12+ to have their own recommend. It used to be that they would be interviewed for each youth temple trip and their names placed on a group recommend. Now they get their own recommend that is good for 1 year. Generally speaking, I think this is a good thing. It reduces the interview burden on the bishopric and gives the youth more access to the temple (provided they can keep track of the recommend ). However, if my stake is part of a larger trend then any recent increase in recommend holders could be due to a youth "bump" similar to but, but likely even greater, than the missionary age change.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

However, if my stake is part of a larger trend then any recent increase in recommend holders could be due to a youth "bump" similar to but, but likely even greater, than the missionary age change.

 

Actually, I don't think so. While the trend is more than just your stake, I don't think those are the numbers that are bumping the recommends. Youth recommends are not recorded on any system like adult recommends with bar codes. The youth recommends are essentially just like the old adult ones, a piece of paper that allows entrance. But they aren't tracked in any way.

[Scott Lloyd]

I'd like a CFR on his info (an unsupported footnote does not count) but everything Elder Cook said was true. Every (almost) year there are more stakes and wards which must mean more real growth, more TR holders and endowed members than before, and the number of missionaries has been well publicized.

As for members leaving, that could also be true, but the corollary is also true. Over the last 25 years actual number of people joining the church is less now and the rate of growth is significantly less. One could say that fewer people care enough about mormonism to either leave or join.

Elder Cook speaks legalese and is now an executive of a multibillion dollar organization. He is very comfortable giving partial facts (courtesy of Dallin Oaks

How about a CFR from you on the notion that the Church is weakening or that "fewer people care enough about [the Church of Jesus Christ] to either leave or join"?

 

What Elder Cook essentially did was to contradict such babble. So the ball is now in the court of the doomsayers to either put up or shut up.

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, not me personally, but the citizens of Marin County have been benefiting from his legal prowess for over 20 years now.  I generally hold the leaders of the Church* in high regard, but there are exceptions.

 

But that is neither here nor there regarding his claim about "church strength".  I understand a GC talk isn't the venue to rattle off statistics, but if Church leaders are going to introduce the number of people leaving as a valid concern for the Church members in general, then they should publish the numbers. 

 

 

*and lawyers, of which my dad is one

Actually, those who initiated the debate are those who for quite a while now have been asserting a priori that people are leaving the Church in droves or that the rate of apostasy has never been higher and similar nonsense.

 

I'm quite sure Elder Cook didn't mean it as such, but I see his general conference statement as a challenge to them to validate their doomsaying. Let them do so in a persuasive, sound and cogent manner, and I will join you in calling for documented rebuttal from the Church.

Edited April 9, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm not sure I understand.  Since 1995, the Church has built or announced 10 Temples in Utah, which more than doubles the 7 that were built before 1995. 

 

Granted, the previous Temple had been completed in 1981, but do the number of Temples really indicate a commensurate increase in recommend holders? 

 

Utah population increased from ~2M in 1995 to ~3M in 2015, and the percentage of the population being LDS seems to hold steady at about 60%, so in this case, I'm not sure Temples are an explicit indicator of commensurate Church growth (or strength).   There is probably some increase, but I imagine the number of recommend holders/Temple has decreased drastically over the past 25 years.    There also seems to be a strong desire to shorten the distance members have to drive to get to the Temple, which is fine, but isn't necessarily directly related to Church growth.

Are you saying the Church typically constructs temples even in places where there are not enough temple-worthy members to justify the expenditure of resources?

 

 

Given such leniency, virtually any area in the Church would be a candidate for placement of a temple.

 

Obviously, with limited resources, the Church cannot build temples everywhere, so it makes sense that they would be placed in locales where the people would be likely to keep them busy through their worthiness and frequency of attendance.

 

As for the temples in Utah, I very clearly recall President Hinckley saying at the groundbreaking for the Draper Utah Temple that he had been asked why another temple was being built in the Salt Lake Valley and he explicitly gave the answer that it was because it was needed to accommodate the number of temple-going people.

 

I assure you the Church would not be building more temples in Utah if the numbers didn't justify it.

 

Edited to add:

 

I looked up my report of the groundbreaking of the Draper Utah Temple.

 

President Hinckley said on that occasion:

 

"This is a really remarkable time," the Church president exclaimed "as we break ground for the 12th temple to be built in Utah, the third in this valley. We are frequently asked, 'Why so many temples in Utah?' It is because we need them. The Jordan River Temple is extremely busy, and the Salt Lake Temple is likewise busy. It is a great tribute to our people that they are so faithful in temple attendance."

President Hinckley added, "If people continue to move here, it may become necessary to build another, or two; but this will not be for some time — don't count on it tomorrow!"

 

Edited April 9, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Good points.

 

One other consideration. In my stake there has been a recent push for all youth 12+ to have their own recommend. It used to be that they would be interviewed for each youth temple trip and their names placed on a group recommend. Now they get their own recommend that is good for 1 year. Generally speaking, I think this is a good thing. It reduces the interview burden on the bishopric and gives the youth more access to the temple (provided they can keep track of the recommend ). However, if my stake is part of a larger trend then any recent increase in recommend holders could be due to a youth "bump" similar to but, but likely even greater, than the missionary age change.

I think limited-use temple recommends for youth are a good thing as well.

 

But when Elder Cook mentioned current temple recommend holders, I got the impression he was referring to full-use temple recommends held by adults.

[CV75]

 

Well, I understood the point of the gospel topics essays to be a counter to what is perceived as misinformation or incomplete information that members and investigators were finding online.

 

Recognizing that today so much information about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints can be obtained from questionable and often inaccurate sources, officials of the Church began in 2013 to publish straightforward, in-depth essays on a number of topics. The purpose of these essays has been to gather accurate information from many different sources and publications and place it in the Gospel Topics section of LDS.org, where the material can more easily be accessed and studied by Church members and other interested parties.

 

Media reports have at times offered inaccurate or distorted analyses of some of these essays. We urge all to read the essays as written rather than relying on the characterization of their content by others.  (From LDS.org)

 

Given that objective, I assume that the hope is that the essays would keep members in the church rather than leading them out... that the content would help resolve challenges to faith rather than create them.

 

When I read this quote I think of a couple of things. Nowhere is it stated that the purpose of the essays is to “keep members in the Church (setting the need for qualifying that phrase aside).” It is evident from the instructions in the Handbook(s) and relayed through leadership that there are many other, and expressly designated approaches to accomplish this than the essays. And in addition to Church members, “other interested parties” are also a target audience. While accurate information straightforwardly presented meets a certain highly valued standard for consumption, a person’s simply accessing and studying it is neither the key to preventing or resolving his faith challenges nor the cause of them. This is why the Church boldly promotes those methods that do “keep members in the Church” and doesn’t point everyone to the essays as the means of establishing and strengthening faith.

[rockpond]

When I read this quote I think of a couple of things. Nowhere is it stated that the purpose of the essays is to “keep members in the Church (setting the need for qualifying that phrase aside).” It is evident from the instructions in the Handbook(s) and relayed through leadership that there are many other, and expressly designated approaches to accomplish this than the essays. And in addition to Church members, “other interested parties” are also a target audience. While accurate information straightforwardly presented meets a certain highly valued standard for consumption, a person’s simply accessing and studying it is neither the key to preventing or resolving his faith challenges nor the cause of them. This is why the Church boldly promotes those methods that do “keep members in the Church” and doesn’t point everyone to the essays as the means of establishing and strengthening faith.

 

Yes, of course, there are more important methods we use to minister to our members.  All I'm saying is that it would be nice if essays on LDS.org weren't catalysts for people leaving or going inactive.

[stemelbow]

Actually, those who initiated the debate are those who for quite a while now have been asserting a priori that people are leaving the Church in droves or that the rate of apostasy has never been higher higher and similar nonsense.

 

I'm quite sure Elder Cook didn't mean it as such, but I see his general conference statement as a challenge to them to validate their doomsaying. Let them do so in a persuasive, sound and cogent manner, and I will join you in calling for documented rebuttal from the Church.

I think everyone agrees with Elder Cook that the Church could be considered strong in some measures and still agree with Marlin Jensen, that we haven't seen "apostasy" like we see today since Kirtland. I think most here agree, that apostasy often results in people going inactive--leaving their names on rolls but not considering themselves believers.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

What Elder Cook essentially did was to contradict such babble. So the ball is now in the court of the doomsayers to either put up or shut up.

 

 

It's hard to provide evidence when it is held by the church and they don't release it. Only the church can provide the evidence. Scott, perhaps as a member of the press you can request they release the information about the number of resignations for each year. That would put it to rest one way or the other.

[Scott Lloyd]

It's hard to provide evidence when it is held by the church and they don't release it. Only the church can provide the evidence.

As I said earlier in this thread, people ought not be indulging in idle chatter about resignations en masse from the Church if they can't provide the evidence to back it up.

 

And if they do so indulge, you ought to be calling them to account for their assertions before making demands on Church leaders for contradicting them.

[Scott Lloyd]

I think everyone agrees with Elder Cook that the Church could be considered strong in some measures and still agree with Marlin Jensen, that we haven't seen "apostasy" like we see today since Kirtland. I think most here agree, that apostasy often results in people going inactive--leaving their names on rolls but not considering themselves believers.

This doesn't make sense in light of what Elder Cook said.

 

He said resignations are actually lower than 25 years ago, and that other metrics -- current temple recommend holders, tithepayers and people qualified to serve missions -- argue against the notion that people are drifting into inactivity more than ever before.

[Teancum]

How about a CFR from you on the notion that the Church is weakening or that "fewer people care enough about [the Church of Jesus Christ] to either leave or join"?

 

What Elder Cook essentially did was to contradict such babble. So the ball is now in the court of the doomsayers to either put up or shut up.

 

and again Elder Cook did so without providing any data at all. Nor does his footnote. He may be right, he may be bloviating.  I don't know either way.

[Scott Lloyd]

and again Elder Cook did so without providing any data at all. Nor does his footnote. He may be right, he may be bloviating.  I don't know either way.

But logic says he doesn't need to provide any data until the doomsayers provide evidence to back up what they are saying. Their assertions collapse on their own from their lack of substantiation.

 

Are you as ready to acknowledge that the doomsayers "may be bloviating"? If they are, then the Church has no obligation to take seriously their empty assertions.

[Scott Lloyd]

Yes, of course, there are more important methods we use to minister to our members.  All I'm saying is that it would be nice if essays on LDS.org weren't catalysts for people leaving or going inactive.

Nicer than if the Church hadn't published the essays at all?

 

What is it you want?

[HappyJackWagon]

As I said earlier in this thread, people ought not be indulging in idle chatter about resignations en masse from the Church if they can't provide the evidence to back it up.

 

And if they do so indulge, you ought to be calling them to account for their assertions before making demands on Church leaders for contradicting them.

So without evidence no one should ask any questions? You work for a newspaper, right? Based on observations one may ask a question or postulate a theory and then seek the answers. If those with the evidence (the church) refuse to provide the evidence that would answer the question, they have successfully dodged the issue. The church has the power here. They can release info or not, but with no documentation on either side, it seems everyone is on equal ground to theorize as much as they would like.