25 Years And Strength

[Scott Lloyd]

Agreed. So much so. We might get more converts and we might gain more for the kids going on missions.

No true convert is won without that person embracing the principles and ordinances of the gospel, the Restoration of the gospel in latter days, the divinity of the Book of Mormon, the authenticity of priesthood, latter-day revelation, etc.

 

Again, digging wells for people in third-world countries is good, but all by itself it doesn't win converts.

[ERayR]

I do agree the Church is stronger than it was 25 years ago, in many ways.

But, I think there is one way in which the Church is having a hard time.

25 years ago (1989) there were 39,739 full time missionaries (give or take). We had well over 300,000 convert baptisms.

This past year (2014) there were 85,000 full time missionaries. More than twice as many missionaries, and yet we had only 297,000 convert baptisms.

This missionary effort is twice as inefficient as it used to be. What has changed?

Preach My Gospel

Raising the bar

Age change

Are these all oopsies? Should we learn from history and change our practices back to what they once were?

Or Have we arrived at a time where we need to rethink our missionary strategy?

Or edited to add:

Is this plateauing expected?

Are we far more interested in getting missionaries on missions then gettings convert baptisms (considering poor retention rates)?

 

With what is happening in the world I am surprised we are doing as well as we are.  Wasn't 1989 when the Berlin wall fell thus opening up vast new fields for missionary work?

[ALarson]

I'm sorry but google is available in 3rd world countries, much cheaper than the US, so is the equipment needed to use it. I paid 15$ a month in El Salvador for the same gigabytes i pay 50$ a month for in the US.

Oh, I know.  But, there are still areas where they aren't as accessible as here in the U.S., that's all I was referring to.

[ALarson]

Service is good. But it should not be undertaken at the expense of direct preaching of the gospel, if that's what you are suggesting.

I was suggesting service missions.

 

What better way to get to know someone than to serve them or serve right along side them?  The preaching of the gospel could happen later or during, if the person was receptive to hearing it.

[rongo]

I remain amazed that people appear to continue to be surprised that convert baptisms (especially per missionary) have fallen sharply. The missionary program has shifted to a retention program, an extension of the youth program, rather than the missionary program it once was. This is clear in a lot of ways. With increasingly more and more youth "going on missions" but not doing any finding, why would we expect to have more baptisms (or to expect that baptisms don't drop)?

 

This shows how effective "social media missionary work" is. 

 

As far as "service missions," many North American missions are trying this. Missionaries are primarily seeking service opportunities with no emphasis on finding people to teach. My stake has this right now. 

 

I've mentioned this before, but my mission is going to start pulling missionaries during their last six months for "life skills training" (dating, interviewing, resumes, money management, etc.). What effect do you think this will have on convert baptisms?

[phaedrus ut]

Not sure if you did, but you have to factor in deceased and those who leave.

...

We had more deaths and people leaving then we had new children added to the records. That's not good for a Church that's been growing for years.

 

I did see that mentioned elsewhere.  That's why I like the members per unit measurement because it automatically factors in inactivity, resignations, and deaths.  It will be interesting to see how all these statistics play out in the coming years.  If you compare the past decade congregation growth is less than half of reported membership growth and closer to one third as much.  By comparison over the same decade Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses both showed congregation growth percentages nearly identical to their membership growth percentage. 

 

If the trends we've seen for the past 15 years hold we are probably 5 -10 years away from reaching peak active Mormon membership. 

 

 

Phaedrus

[JLHPROF]

I remain amazed that people appear to continue to be surprised that convert baptisms (especially per missionary) have fallen sharply.

 

Me too.  But that is because there is a pervasive false doctrine among some members as to the Church converting all the good people in the entire world before Christ returns and the wicked are swept off.  As if when he returns you're either Mormon or toast.

 

It is not Church doctrine but seems to be the perspective of many - the Church's missionary effort will go until everyone has had the choice BEFORE the end of times and Christ will return to a huge world Church to rule.  Nope.

[carbon dioxide]

Just like the Marines say they are looking for a few good men with the medal to be Marines, Mormons are looking for a few good people with the medal to be Latter Day Saints.  Our faith requires commitment and sacrifice.  In a world that is becoming more wicked and lazy, we should expect things to be tough in a lot of areas.  I expect a stagnant or slow decline in the number of convert baptisms for a while.  The field is not as white as it used to be.  Eventually the missionaries will be called home and the Lord will preach a sermon that gets the attention of the wicked in a more serious way.  Mockery of the faith will turn to fear.  As long as we do what is expected of us, everything will work out in the end.

Edited April 8, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[rongo]

I also think that the principle of Gideon's army applies. They were much stronger with the 300 dedicated than they were with the initial 10,000. I think we get too caught up with numbers. If we only had 10,000 baptisms in a year, but those 10,000 were very dedicated and committed, in many ways we would be "stronger" than if we baptized, say, 296,000 or so in a year, but most of them were not converted or committed.

 

Are we a "stronger" church today with 15 million nominal members (but maybe only 4 million dedicated), or were we stronger when the entire church was almost exclusively about 250,000 members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona? The dead weight drain on any given ward list (non-attending, non-tithe-paying, hostile if you visit them) is a drag on the Church's "strength" right now, and is getting worse with our current cycle of convert baptisms, retention, and ministering.

[rockpond]

Also, as a YM president and father, I notice our youth seem to be struggling with this as well as other philosophies including legalized pot, gender roles and gay marriage.

 

I do know as a lay member, I definitely feel and observe a lot more people getting out of the church than I do getting in.

 

This has been my experience as well.  Though not with respect to legalized pot... I haven't heard them commenting on that.

[rockpond]

I did see that mentioned elsewhere.  That's why I like the members per unit measurement because it automatically factors in inactivity, resignations, and deaths.  It will be interesting to see how all these statistics play out in the coming years.  If you compare the past decade congregation growth is less than half of reported membership growth and closer to one third as much.  By comparison over the same decade Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses both showed congregation growth percentages nearly identical to their membership growth percentage. 

 

If the trends we've seen for the past 15 years hold we are probably 5 -10 years away from reaching peak active Mormon membership. 

 

 

Phaedrus

 

I think that the trends suggest something closer to 20 years but that's assuming the steady decline continues.  If Elder Cook happens to be wrong and those trends drop faster due to some of the issues we are currently facing, it could be closer to 10 years.

[rockpond]

I have wondered if service missions would be more effective in attracting converts?  I know that the missionaries perform service now, but what if their missions were devoted to this especially in certain parts of the world?

 

 

No true convert is won without that person embracing the principles and ordinances of the gospel, the Restoration of the gospel in latter days, the divinity of the Book of Mormon, the authenticity of priesthood, latter-day revelation, etc.

 

Again, digging wells for people in third-world countries is good, but all by itself it doesn't win converts.

 

While I agree that it doesn't convert people, I think having missionaries do significantly more service would open doors and help morale among missionaries.  It feels like we are headed that direction.

[CV75]

I do agree the Church is stronger than it was 25 years ago, in many ways.

But, I think there is one way in which the Church is having a hard time.

25 years ago (1989) there were 39,739 full time missionaries (give or take). We had well over 300,000 convert baptisms.

This past year (2014) there were 85,000 full time missionaries. More than twice as many missionaries, and yet we had only 297,000 convert baptisms.

This missionary effort is twice as inefficient as it used to be. What has changed?

Preach My Gospel

Raising the bar

Age change

Are these all oopsies? Should we learn from history and change our practices back to what they once were?

Or Have we arrived at a time where we need to rethink our missionary strategy?

Or edited to add:

Is this plateauing expected?

Are we far more interested in getting missionaries on missions then gettings convert baptisms (considering poor retention rates)?

Being stronger does not prevent having a hard time (we are to endure).

 

I think the growth in the number of missionaries and the drop in conversion is a sign of the times -- both the faithful and the adversary become stronger. Striking a balance between the two? Fuggedaboudit--the Lord will always win on one side of the veil or the other.

 

I think the expansion of duties our missionaries are assigned to perform is an expression of the overall strengthening and contributes to a holistic approach to establishing the Gospel -- I recall some recent talks about missionary, genealogy, retention, etc. all being the same work and should be viewed as such. That is where the "balance" is increasing and how the missionaries are preparing / being prepared to continue that development after they get home.

[stemelbow]

Can I ask something, what are you personally doing to share the gospel?

Mostly just interacting with people as often as I can.

[stemelbow]

Fewf! It's amazing to me that our growth rate declined from over 8 percent in 1989 to under 2 percent this year, and that staggering drop doesn't seem to be alarming anyone. And that drop happened when we are supposed to be seeing success from having a huge number of missionaries added. What's just as alarming is when the surge began to now, we've seen a decline in conversions. This blowing off the decline by saying it's the signs of the times and all that doesn't seem to take into account the facts. It's just pretending all is well, or something.

These figures support strongly the notion that the Church is not so strong and may indeed see some pretty dark times ahead.

[rongo]

Again, stem, you're assuming that "a huge number of missionaries added" are trying to find people to teach. Many of them (especially in North America, where most of these surge missionaries are going) spend most of their time doing service projects or social media contacting. In my city, you can find ten missionaries hogging up the computer bank at the public library all day long on any given day (not just Monday, their P-day). Or at Walmart.

 

Who expects a rise in converts under this?

[ALarson]

Fewf! It's amazing to me that our growth rate declined from over 8 percent in 1989 to under 2 percent this year, and that staggering drop doesn't seem to be alarming anyone. And that drop happened when we are supposed to be seeing success from having a huge number of missionaries added. What's just as alarming is when the surge began to now, we've seen a decline in conversions. This blowing off the decline by saying it's the signs of the times and all that doesn't seem to take into account the facts. It's just pretending all is well, or something.

These figures support strongly the notion that the Church is not so strong and may indeed see some pretty dark times ahead.

I think this is why Elder Cook's recent statements have caused some to wonder.  I know that using the word "strength" can mean many things and it's been suggested he was referring to the "inner strength" of the church.  His examples of temple recommend holders and tithe payers increasing could very well be because of the recent surge of missionaries going out.  A lot more young people going to the temple and a lot more parents (possibly) who weren't holding current recommends but wanting to go to the temple with their missionary child.  There are just many variables, but the stats that were shared show a slow down of growth.

 

Also, the one stat they really don't have is the number of members who are still attending but no longer believe.  I'm sort of in that category in that I went through my own faith crisis and I'm now active again, but I do not have the blind belief that I had prior to this.  I do love my ward and I love a lot about the church.

Edited April 8, 2015 by ALarson

[stemelbow]

Again, stem, you're assuming that "a huge number of missionaries added" are trying to find people to teach. Many of them (especially in North America, where most of these surge missionaries are going) spend most of their time doing service projects or social media contacting. In my city, you can find ten missionaries hogging up the computer bank at the public library all day long on any given day (not just Monday, their P-day). Or at Walmart.

 

Who expects a rise in converts under this?

So a couple of years ago we had more converts with far less missionaries than we do today, and we shrug that off because missionaries are doing service projects and playing around on the computer? This seems to touch on my point. It sounds like we need to really consider changing the program. Why send kids out to play on computers when they can do that at home?

[stemelbow]

I think this is why Elder Cook's recent statements have caused some to wonder.  I know that using the word "strength" can mean many things and it's been suggested he was referring to the "inner strength" of the church.  His examples of temple recommend holders and tithe payers increasing could very well be because of the recent surge of missionaries going out.  A lot more young people going to the temple and a lot more parents (possibly) who weren't holding current recommends but wanting to go to the temple with their missionary child.  There are just many variables, but the stats that were shared show a slow down of growth.

 

Also, the one stat they really don't have is the number of members who are still attending but no longer believe.  I'm sort of in that category in that I went through my own faith crisis and I'm now active again, but I do not have the blind belief that I had prior to this.  I do love my ward and I love a lot about the church.

That's cool. In my mind, by far, the biggest reason we are seeing an increase in temple attendance and endowed members is the availability of temples. The surge might play some sort of a factor in it.

[carbon dioxide]

Growth should not be equated as the same as strength.  A 250 pound linebacker that maintains his weight remains strong even though he is not growing while someone who weight is gaining 5% a year probably is going to run into a problem if it goes on too long.  If our growth becomes stagnant but we increase in righteousness internally we are getting stronger.  We are just not getting bigger. 

 

I believe the Church grows at a rate that God wants it to.  God knows the Church membership could not support a million baptisms a year.  How many would fall away?  Better to baptize one strong person than 5 weak people who come for a few months and then stop.  If God wants to grow the Church to 50 million by 2020 he can do that.  All God has to do is place a pillar of fire above every temple around the world and that will wake a lot of people up.  We might get a couple hundred million within a couple of years if that was to happen. 

[stemelbow]

Growth should not be equated as the same as strength.  A 250 pound linebacker that maintains his weight remains strong even though he is not growing while someone who weight is gaining 5% a year probably is going to run into a problem if it goes on too long.  If our growth becomes stagnant but we increase in righteousness internally we are getting stronger.  We are just not getting bigger.

The problem is, we're an 80 lb linebacker pretending to be a 250 lb linebacker. We may have heart, but we aren't very effective.

 

I believe the Church grows at a rate that God wants it to.  God knows the Church membership could not support a million baptisms a year.  How many would fall away?  Better to baptize one strong person than 5 weak people who come for a few months and then stop.  If God wants to grow the Church to 50 million by 2020 he can do that.  All God has to do is place a pillar of fire above every temple around the world and that will wake a lot of people up.  We might get a couple hundred million within a couple of years if that was to happen.

Are you thinking our conversions are all strong, meaning our retention rates make up for our drop in conversions? Hmm...like to see those numbers.

[carbon dioxide]

The problem is, we're an 80 lb linebacker pretending to be a 250 lb linebacker. We may have heart, but we aren't very effective.

 

Are you thinking our conversions are all strong, meaning our retention rates make up for our drop in conversions? Hmm...like to see those numbers.

I don't know what our retention rate is.  I have never seen an actual valid statistical number.  As to the 80 pound linebacker, if he believes he is a 250 pound linebacker and attempts to play against an offense that has 200 plus pound player, he is going to be in big trouble.  But if that 80 pound linebacker plays against other people his same size, his weight is not an issue.  My point is people are thinking that strength means how much the church is growing in terms of membership numbers.  Size and strength are not the same thing.  One can be small in size and growing in strength or big and weak.  If the measure of the strength of the Church is how many converts or the retention rate is the main focus, it is probably not a good measure.  It is possible for the church to get stronger while having a declining rate of converts or even a small increase in the number of people leaving.

[stemelbow]

I don't know what our retention rate is.  I have never seen an actual valid statistical number.

Then why assume our conversions produce stronger members than it used to?

 

As to the 80 pound linebacker, if he believes he is a 250 pound linebacker and attempts to play against an offense that has 200 plus pound player, he is going to be in big trouble.  But if that 80 pound linebacker plays against other people his same size, his weight is not an issue.  My point is people are thinking that strength means how much the church is growing in terms of membership numbers.  Size and strength are not the same thing.  One can be small in size and growing in strength or big and weak.  If the measure of the strength of the Church is how many converts or the retention rate is the main focus, it is probably not a good measure.  It is possible for the church to get stronger while having a declining rate of converts or even a small increase in the number of people leaving.

I agree that it can possibly be stronger with declining rate of conversions and a small in crease in the # of people leaving. But we'd just be guessing we're stronger if by stronger we mean the members themselves have stronger testimonies. So how do we measure strength?

[CV75]

Fewf! It's amazing to me that our growth rate declined from over 8 percent in 1989 to under 2 percent this year, and that staggering drop doesn't seem to be alarming anyone. And that drop happened when we are supposed to be seeing success from having a huge number of missionaries added. What's just as alarming is when the surge began to now, we've seen a decline in conversions. This blowing off the decline by saying it's the signs of the times and all that doesn't seem to take into account the facts. It's just pretending all is well, or something.

These figures support strongly the notion that the Church is not so strong and may indeed see some pretty dark times ahead.

"Staggering" and "alarming" are such subjective interpretations of the growth rate data. Blowing off the decline in growth rate and assessing it in context of the big picture (along with prophesy and prophetic leadership) are two different things. There is also a big difference between "all is well" and having optimism in the face of the signs of the times, having a hope in Christ and an understanding of His work.

 

So the figures needn't be surprising at all; not to me, anyway. Tragic that more people aren't joining? Absolutely, but more or less missionaries isn't necessarily going to help that; we can only work with what we have. The success and the strengthening is in the inviting, and while this is compounded by the accepting, it needn't be diminished by the refusing.

 

I think "notions" typically arise without a reliance on hard data, and are particularly vulnerable to confirmation bias. They are also typically independent of of divine guidance.

[Gray]

These figures support strongly the notion that the Church is not so strong and may indeed see some pretty dark times ahead.

 

I don't know. I know there is a long tradition of placing a lot of importance on growth (more names on the membership list, and if possible more rears in the pews at the same time), but I'm not sure growth is the be all end all of everything. If anything, I think the obsession with growth is a distraction for any church - a distraction from more important missions like feeding the flock spiritually and feeding the hungry physically.