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

[Shanky82]

Can I ask a question of those harping on Elder Cook for his statement in Conference about this?  Why is it that Elder Cook must provide numbers to back up his claim but those who are claiming that members of the church (especially youth and young single adults) are leaving in droves?  How many members (especially youth and young single adults) are leaving the church? 

 

I am from Minnesota and currently going to school at BYUI.  I don't see a mass exodus of members in liberal-progressive Minnesota or here in uber-republican Rexburg.  Could Teancum and Rockpond please provide numbers for their claims of mass exodus?

[Senator]

They can't yet they can claim things and nobody demands data from them.  Its a two way street.  If one demands evidence from one side, they need to demand evidence from the other.   I see no reason for the church to get into a detailed response to a baseless allegation.

Well, information control is a very powerful tool, and the advantage always goes to the holder of the information.

[carbon dioxide]

Well, information control is a very powerful tool, and the advantage always goes to the holder of the information.

I will go along with that.  But that fact does not excuse those who make claims that they don't have to pony up something as well.  People join and leave the Church every day.  That is something we can all agree on.  But if someone is claiming that the rates of leaving have increased, they need to show it.  There has to be some basis of fact in the claim.  They just can claim and and then demand the Church provide evidence that what they said is not true and if they don't there allegation that had no facts to support it suddenly become true.

[carbon dioxide]

I am from Minnesota and currently going to school at BYUI.  I don't see a mass exodus of members in liberal-progressive Minnesota or here in uber-republican Rexburg.  Could Teancum and Rockpond please provide numbers for their claims of mass exodus?

Perhaps it would help if someone actually defined what a "mass exodus" is.  What does that look like.  Does it mean 10000 people.  50000 people.  Without even defining that, how could one even start to refute it as what is a mass exodus for one person is not to another.

[ALarson]

Perhaps it would help if someone actually defined what a "mass exodus" is.  What does that look like.  Does it mean 10000 people.  50000 people.  Without even defining that, how could one even start to refute it as what is a mass exodus for one person is not to another.

Good question.  I don't like the term "mass exodus" and I don't believe one is taking place within the church.  I think people tend to say what they want to believe or what they hope is the truth. Exaggerations or extreme statements on both sides are not helpful and the truth is probably somewhere in between.  But then everyone has a right to their opinions and views too.

Edited April 5, 2015 by ALarson

[Mystery Meat]

I have hesitated to participate in this thread for my own reasons. Let me just say this. I knew Elder Cook's talk was coming. Particularly the statement that is the subject of this thread. I had a conversation with somebody who would know about a month ago. In that conversation this individual informed me (as he has seen the number and he is a person who I not only trust but someone who would know) that despite popular belief the percentage of active members of the church has been skyrocketing (relative to what it was). This is due in part to the surge. Additionally, retention is better than it has ever been.

 

That is about all I can say. 

[Teancum]

Here's an example.

 

We know that the Northeast is a bastion of Mormonism, correct? (being facetious there for those can't tell)

 

During hurricane Sandy, the Mormon Helping Hands went into action to assist people in New York and New Jersey (interesting story about the problems getting in due to government incompetence, but that's for another time). You'd think that with that many people that needed help, the Mormons would only be a drop in the bucket. But it wasn't that way. It seemed that everywhere you went, there were yellow shirts around. Busloads of them. They got to a point where there wasn't any work left to do in some areas. It was absolutely amazing.

 

It's not that the Mormons were the only ones out helping, but their numbers seemed way out of proportion. Where did they all come from? I'm still trying to figure that out.

 

 

The Church and its members certianly excel in reaching out in times of need.

 

I am not sure how this bears on this discussion.

 

Also I am not sure who is saying the church is about to implode.   Perhaps someone can give some references.

 

I have never said that.  I do think it is losing members at a rate that may be higher than in the past.  It also has trouble holding on youth.  If you believe the anecdotal stories many disaffected come from ranks of the strong and economically sound members.  That can't help.

 

On the other hand I noted above in many ways it is stronger than it ever has been.   35%-50% active of 15 million is stronger than the same %p of a lower number.  Yet it is all relative. The growth is slow, a lower % and the ROI on the missionaries is lower than it has been in a very long time.  The 30,000 missionaries when I served converted almost as much as 80,000 that serve now. I would not be excited about that result.  On the other hand the result on the missionary itself may be the greatest return for the Church.

 

I think the church will continue to grow and a moderate rate.  It will be a long, long time before the Church is large in numbers on  world wide scale.   Maybe it will never be. The BoM seems to say so.

[Teancum]

Of course the claim that the Church is falling apart, people are leaving in masses ect is also not show by any real data.  People just throw the claim out without any support.  So yes he did not provide data but those he is responding to have not shown any real hard data either.  There is nothing to suggest that the LDS Church activity rate, retention rate, rate of members leaving the Church has changed much in the past few decades.  Why demand data from Elder Cook when the people who make these claims do not provide data and nobody demands it from them?

 

Who is claiming the Church is falling apart?   How do you define leaving in masses?  Loss officially of about 100k per year is not small (some of those are deaths).   What we don't know is how many drop out but don't resign.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Teancum

[why me]

This doesn't have much to do with numbers but with the faith and commitment of the active members. In this the church has never been stronger. People have always fallen away from the church or went inactive. Nothing much has changed in this regard. And even with the internet attempting to lead members off the beaten path, the church is still strong in spirit.

 

However, there is no question that the church will face hard times. No reason for it not to. People will leave, the internet will be full of misinformation, attempting to get people not to join. However, how wonderful the world would be if the lds church were larger, and filled with dedicate members. No question that the world would be a holier place to live in and much more pleasant place. But....with satan on the prowl, leading people into dark horizons I can see barriers for the human being to overcome these horizons. It will get worse before it gets better. And on this board, how many lds members are moaning and groaning about the leadership of the church and moaning and groaning about this and that but overlooking the bigger picture that the church can offer a person a good life in a worldly world. A way of being in the opposite of what we are living in.

[jwhitlock]

Who is claiming the Church is falling apart?   How do you define leaving in masses?  Loss officially of about 100k per year is not small (some of those are deaths).   What we don't know is how many drop out but don't resign.

 

"Some of those are deaths?" The global mortality rate is currently 8 per 1000. In a church of 15,000,000 people that would result in an expected 120,000 deaths per year.

[readstoomuch]

I disagree with this. There are many intellectual, thinking people who have strong testimonies of the church. They have been able to put things into perspective. They understand that the foundation of testimony is not "my will be done" but "God's will be done", and they know that God's will is manifest in the church.

 

One does not have to leave intellectualism behind to be a faithful church member. Faithful, spiritual church membership opens doors of intellectual understanding that remain otherwise closed.

I disagree with this. There are many intellectual, thinking people who have strong testimonies of the church. They have been able to put things into perspective. They understand that the foundation of testimony is not "my will be done" but "God's will be done", and they know that God's will is manifest in the church.

 

One does not have to leave intellectualism behind to be a faithful church member. Faithful, spiritual church membership opens doors of intellectual understanding that remain otherwise closed.

You are correct. I think some do and the are often in the 18-30 age group. I struggle with some manuals, but I keep trying. I wish the were more historically accurate and discussed controversial topics.

[jwhitlock]

I am not sure how this bears on this discussion.

 

When we're talking about signs of the true strength of the church, it is very pertinent. 

[jwhitlock]

You are correct. I think some do and the are often in the 18-30 age group. I struggle with some manuals, but I keep trying. I wish the were more historically accurate and discussed controversial topics.

 

When I was in that age range, I thought I knew everything.  Years later, after extensive and necessary pruning, I'm beginning to get some proper perspective.

 

One of the things that I've learned is that there is no such thing as accurate history. We do not have the ability or resources to put past events in full context in order to really understand them. We can't even agree on what's happening today, let alone in the past.  All we can do study and analyze what we can, and then - as Latter-day Saints - use the gift of the Spirit to start to understand what really happened.

[Teancum]

"Some of those are deaths?" The global mortality rate is currently 8 per 1000. In a church of 15,000,000 people that would result in an expected 120,000 deaths per year.

 

 

You may be right. I am just chatting about it.   Maybe they are all deaths then and nobody is leaving the church nor being removed by their leaders.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Teancum

[Thinking]

What Elder Cook was addressing -- and contradicting -- was claims that the Church internally is suffering a massive hemorrhage in its membership.

 

These are his exact words.

 

"Some have asserted that more members are leaving the Church today, and that there is more doubt and unbelief than in the past. This is simply not true. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has never been stronger. The number of members removing their names from the records of the Church has always been very small, and is significantly less in recent years than in the past. The increase in demonstrably measurable areas such as endowed members with a current temple recommend, adult full-tithe payers, and those serving missions has been dramatic."

[ChristKnight]

Here's an example.

 

We know that the Northeast is a bastion of Mormonism, correct? (being facetious there for those can't tell)

 

During hurricane Sandy, the Mormon Helping Hands went into action to assist people in New York and New Jersey (interesting story about the problems getting in due to government incompetence, but that's for another time). You'd think that with that many people that needed help, the Mormons would only be a drop in the bucket. But it wasn't that way. It seemed that everywhere you went, there were yellow shirts around. Busloads of them. They got to a point where there wasn't any work left to do in some areas. It was absolutely amazing.

 

It's not that the Mormons were the only ones out helping, but their numbers seemed way out of proportion. Where did they all come from? I'm still trying to figure that out.

 

I participated in those efforts (I was EQP of a YSA ward in Manhattan at that time).  It really was wonderful to help.  Sunday meetings in the stake were cancelled at least 2-3 times, and instead we went to the Rockaways and elsewhere.  Non-members were also invited to attend.  I met people from various stakes in NY, NJ, CT, PA, Boston (one girl from my ward ran into people she knew from home in Boston), and IIRC, Canada.  The missionaries were also there.  After doing what we could, we were instructed to hand out little pamphlets about the humanitarian aid efforts of the church (though, after the first time, I felt awkward giving those out).  I really enjoyed the service.

[The Nehor]

There really is a huge double standard regarding this on here.

 

If someone posted that the church is drastically shrinking and that the numbers of the resignations are sky rocketing, the very posters who are accepting Elder Cook's statements without stats to back them up would be demanding proof or statistics supporting these claims.

The difference is that Elder Cook is a credible witness who has access to the data needed to make such a determination. The critics are not and do not.

[Thinking]

The difference is that Elder Cook is a credible witness who has access to the data needed to make such a determination. The critics are not and do not.

 

What information do you have about me that makes me not credible?

[The Nehor]

What information do you have about me that makes me not credible?

I have interacted with you.

[Teancum]

These are his exact words.

 

"Some have asserted that more members are leaving the Church today, and that there is more doubt and unbelief than in the past. This is simply not true. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has never been stronger. The number of members removing their names from the records of the Church has always been very small, and is significantly less in recent years than in the past. The increase in demonstrably measurable areas such as endowed members with a current temple recommend, adult full-tithe payers, and those serving missions has been dramatic."

 

 

Well we can't tell as they don't release the data.   Also this does not account for those who do not have their name removed but go inactive.  Again only in an anecdotal senses from what I see people post in various forums quite a few resign but even more just stop participating.   No way to tall how many that is really.

[Scott Lloyd]

Elder Cook didn't debunk anything because he didn't show any real data.

 

debunk: to show that something (such as a belief or theory) is not true : to show the falseness of (a story, idea, statement, etc.)

Another online definition of debunk is "to expose the falseness or hollowness of (a myth, idea, or belief)."

 

Elder Cook, by virtue of his position as a high leader in the Church, and thus an insider in a position to know, has flatly contradicted claims from those who, as it turns out, don't know what they are talking about. He has thus exposed the falseness or hollowness of their ill-informed rumor-mongering.

 

It is foolish indeed to place someone in Elder Cook's position of credibility on the  level of some anonymous blogger who has only anecdotal information to show. You can't do that without concluding that Elder Cook is either lying or incompetent. Are you willing to go there?

 

I repeat what I said earlier: As there has now been a flat contribution of their claims by someone in a position to know, they now bear the burden to prove their claims. If they don't, said claims collapse from lack of substantiation.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Teancum]

Another online definition of debunk is "expose the falseness or hollowness of (a myth, idea, or belief)."

 

Elder Cook, by virtue of his position as high leader in the Church and thus an insider in a position to know has flatly contradicted claims from those who, as it turns out, don't know what they are talking about. He has thus exposed the falseness or hollowness of their ill-informed rumor-mongering.

 

It is foolish indeed to place someone in Elder Cook's position of credibility on a same level of some anonymous blogger who has only anecdotal information to show.

 

I repeat what I said earlier: As there has now been a flat contribution of their claims by someone in a position to know, they now bear the burden to prove their claims. If they don't, said claims collapse from lack of substantiation.

 

 

CFR for persons claiming the collapse of the church.

[canard78]

Maybe Elder Cook and/or the Church will furnish more facts and figures; maybe not.

Meanwhile, it is at least as rational for me to conclude that Elder Cook was speaking accurately and in good faith as it is for others to assert, imply or assume that he was lying or analyzing facts incompetently. And I see the burden of proof as being on those who assert a priori or with nothing more compelling than anecdotes that the Church of Jesus Christ is suffering a membership hemorrhage.

You're a journalist, right? I'm presuming that you report on stuff other than LDS events.

If you attended the annual meeting of a corporation (let's call them Widgets Incorporated) and a board member said: "Widgets Inc has never been stronger," but provided no sources for this claim, what would you report? What you report that Widgets Inc had never been stronger? Or that the board member claim such?

Let's assume the board member is trustworthy, has a proven track record and is reliable. We've no reason to suppose that he's outright lying and fabricating... But you'd still want to put your hand up, as a journalist, and say, "How do you measure that? Compared to what?"

I'm not suggesting Elder Cook is lying. I'd still be interested to know on what basis and on what measure he's making that claim.

Out of interest, if your editor taps you on the shoulder next week and asks you to follow up on that claim and that talk, will you simply quote sections of the talk, or will you put in a call to the press office to ask whether any supporting facts and figures are available? If you did so, would that receive criticism from the press office? Would they make unfair assumptions about your motives or would they simply acknowledge the request and either provide data or politely decline?

[The Nehor]

Well we can't tell as they don't release the data.   Also this does not account for those who do not have their name removed but go inactive.  Again only in an anecdotal senses from what I see people post in various forums quite a few resign but even more just stop participating.   No way to tall how many that is really.

Actually we can tell if we trust the people who have seen the data. If not then I guess we can choose to wallow in a mire of supposition, suspicion, and vague imaginings that we know more then those who do know. I choose the former.

[The Nehor]

You're a journalist, right? I'm presuming that you report on stuff other than LDS events.

If you attended the annual meeting of a corporation (let's call them Widgets Incorporated) and a board member said: "Widgets Inc has never been stronger," but provided no sources for this claim, what would you report? What you report that Widgets Inc had never been stronger? Or that the board member claim such?

Let's assume the board member is trustworthy, has a proven track record and is reliable. We've no reason to suppose that he's outright lying and fabricating... But you'd still want to put your hand up, as a journalist, and say, "How do you measure that? Compared to what?"

I'm not suggesting Elder Cook is lying. I'd still be interested to know on what basis and on what measure he's making that claim.

Out of interest, if your editor taps you on the shoulder next week and asks you to follow up on that claim and that talk, will you simply quote sections of the talk, or will you put in a call to the press office to ask whether any supporting facts and figures are available? If you did so, would that receive criticism from the press office? Would they make unfair assumptions about your motives or would they simply acknowledge the request and either provide data or politely decline?

A board member is not an apostle.