25 Years And Strenght, Part Ii

[stemelbow]

The Church is stronger than it was 25 years ago--more members, more temples, more missionaries...less converts, but whatever.

Will it be stronger in 25 years from now?

2014 stats:

Convert baps: 296,803

Children of record added: 116,409

Deceased and name removal: 122,903

Catch that? Our deceased and name removal figure is larger than our children added. Without converts we'd be declining. For a growing Church, that doesn't sound good. We should be having young people adding far more children each year. We're growing after all.

Considering our retention rates, our growth overall hitting record lows, and we may see some declining in the future. Will we still be stronger if we decline in numbers?

[Avatar4321]

I was under the impression that children of record are those blessed and not included in membership numbers.

[JLHPROF]

The Church is stronger than it was 25 years ago--more members, more temples, more missionaries...less converts, but whatever.

Will it be stronger in 25 years from now?

2014 stats:

Convert baps: 296,803

Children of record added: 116,409

Deceased and name removal: 122,903

Catch that? Our deceased and name removal figure is larger than our children added. Without converts we'd be declining. For a growing Church, that doesn't sound good. We should be having young people adding far more children each year. We're growing after all.

Considering our retention rates, our growth overall hitting record lows, and we may see some declining in the future. Will we still be stronger if we decline in numbers?

 

Simple:

- Birthrates are down in many western countries

- Church frowning on birth control has long since disappeared

- I would be curious to know if the average Mormon family was still so far ahead of society in terms of number

 

In short, we're having less kids than ever, in some cases barely keeping our marriage covenant to multiply and replenish the earth.

 

Fortunately I think the worldwide birthrate isn't falling as fast as in western countries (I remember Canada panicking about a negative birthrate when I lived there).  Utah still has the highest birthrate in the US, but only 15/50 states have a positive birthrate.

[jwhitlock]

The Church is stronger than it was 25 years ago--more members, more temples, more missionaries...less converts, but whatever.

Will it be stronger in 25 years from now?

2014 stats:

Convert baps: 296,803

Children of record added: 116,409

Deceased and name removal: 122,903

Catch that? Our deceased and name removal figure is larger than our children added. Without converts we'd be declining. For a growing Church, that doesn't sound good. We should be having young people adding far more children each year. We're growing after all.

Considering our retention rates, our growth overall hitting record lows, and we may see some declining in the future. Will we still be stronger if we decline in numbers?

 

One thing I mentioned over on Scott's thread is that the global mortality rate is 8 per 1000. That means in a church with 15,000,000 members, we would expect an annual decrease of about 120,000 members, using the global average.

 

Given the figures you quoted above, that indicates the number of names removed is not really very large at all.

[rongo]

Book of Mormon prophecy indicates that the Gentile Church (the church of the last 185 years, from people of northern European descent ) will decline and go to the "remnant" (descendants of Lehi). Not an apostasy, but a shift.

 

I think we are seeing this gradual decline right now (lack of resilience, apathy, lack of vitality among the members, softness, etc.). 

[Teancum]

The Church is stronger than it was 25 years ago--more members, more temples, more missionaries...less converts, but whatever.

Will it be stronger in 25 years from now?

2014 stats:

Convert baps: 296,803

Children of record added: 116,409

Deceased and name removal: 122,903

Catch that? Our deceased and name removal figure is larger than our children added. Without converts we'd be declining. For a growing Church, that doesn't sound good. We should be having young people adding far more children each year. We're growing after all.

Considering our retention rates, our growth overall hitting record lows, and we may see some declining in the future. Will we still be stronger if we decline in numbers?

 

 

Number of those who go inactive annually but stay members?

[Teancum]

One thing I mentioned over on Scott's thread is that the global mortality rate is 8 per 1000. That means in a church with 15,000,000 members, we would expect an annual decrease of about 120,000 members, using the global average.

 

Given the figures you quoted above, that indicates the number of names removed is not really very large at all.

 

 

You may be correct.  But if we report 15 million members and say 40% or 6 million are active there are a lot out there that we may not know are dying and I think the Church leaves someone on if I recall till they are 110 if they do not know of their death.

[omni]

One thing I mentioned over on Scott's thread is that the global mortality rate is 8 per 1000. That means in a church with 15,000,000 members, we would expect an annual decrease of about 120,000 members, using the global average.

 

Given the figures you quoted above, that indicates the number of names removed is not really very large at all.

 

 I would think that the death rate among members of the church would be significantly less than the global mortality rate considering that:

 

• LDS live disproportionately in developed countries with higher life expectancies;
• LDS have a greater life expectancy than their fellow countrymen; and
• If the church is not notified of a death, it will consider the individual alive until they reach the age of 110.  Considering the high levels of inactivity, I think it's safe to assume this happens quite a bit.

[carbon dioxide]

Considering our retention rates, our growth overall hitting record lows, and we may see some declining in the future. Will we still be stronger if we decline in numbers?

Yes.  If a 500 pound man eats better and gets exercise, he will lose a bunch of weight but get stronger.  Get rid of fat and gain muscle.  The church is only as strong as its weakest link.  If very weak, half committed members leave but the numbers that remain are more committed, the Church is leaner and stronger. 

[stemelbow]

One thing I mentioned over on Scott's thread is that the global mortality rate is 8 per 1000. That means in a church with 15,000,000 members, we would expect an annual decrease of about 120,000 members, using the global average.

 

Given the figures you quoted above, that indicates the number of names removed is not really very large at all.

Sure. I'm not thinking it is large at all. but it is interesting that our loss is greater than the gain we get from children. Considering our growth rate is declining rapidly, and convert baptisms, as a percentage, has been declining sharply for years, we may see a day, in the not distant future, where we have no growth, and then perhaps decline.

[stemelbow]

Number of those who go inactive annually but stay members?

Well that figure, if we every could figure it out, would just make this all worse. Considering our poor retention rates for new converts, that conversion figure, in practice, becomes far less, as we move forward. We baptize, then many leave, without taking their names off the rolls. As that continues, I'm thinking, our activity rate will continue to decline, as well. With that said, we might be at a pretty stagnate point right now. Our rate of adding children has been surpassed by our loss through death, ex'ing, and name removals. Who knows how many just drop out.

hmm...this is interesting. Hopefully it's a problem the 15 are aware of and are trying to figure a way to address it.

[stemelbow]

I would think that the death rate among members of the church would be significantly less than the global mortality rate considering that:

• LDS live disproportionately in developed countries with higher life expectancies;
• LDS have a greater life expectancy than their fellow countrymen; and
• If the church is not notified of a death, it will consider the individual alive until they reach the age of 110.  Considering the high levels of inactivity, I think it's safe to assume this happens quite a bit.

Added to that, you'd think that a Church that has doubled in size in the past 25 years would have a relatively young demographic.

[stemelbow]

Yes.  If a 500 pound man eats better and gets exercise, he will lose a bunch of weight but get stronger.  Get rid of fat and gain muscle.  The church is only as strong as its weakest link.  If very weak, half committed members leave but the numbers that remain are more committed, the Church is leaner and stronger.

Wow...do I disagree. The Church is for the sick and needy just as much as it is for anyone else. Every member, in my mind, is as weak as the others, because we all sin. One of these days the Church is going to have to become more open and accepting, stretching it's wings across the world ready to embrace anyone who shows the slightest interest in goodness and God. As of now, we're this stingy group of self-righteous folks, pretending to want to accept people, which people upon showing the slightest interest run into a huge offensive line. At least that's what it feels like to me, sometimes.

Edited April 8, 2015 by stemelbow

[carbon dioxide]

Wow...do I disagree. The Church is for the sick and needy just as much as it is for anyone else. Every member, in my mind, is as weak as the others, because we all sin. One of these days the Church is going to have to become more open and accepting, stretching it's wings across the world ready to embrace anyone who shows the slightest interest in goodness and God. As of now, we're this stingy group of self-righteous folks, pretending to want to accept people, which people upon showing the slightest interest run into a huge offensive line. At least that's what it feels like to me, sometimes.

It is not an issue of not accepting people.  We accept all people regardless of who they are who want to change their lives and come to Christ.  What the Church can't accept is to change its doctrines and practices as to become more appealing to more people.  Being strong and healthy is different than being big or growing.  One can be small and strong and one can be big, growing, and weak.  Obviously we desire the Church to gain more members but we should not compromise our beliefs to obtain that. 

Edited April 8, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[stemelbow]

It is not an issue of not accepting people.  We accept all people regardless of who they are who want to change their lives and come to Christ.  What the Church can't accept is to change its doctrines and practices as to become more appealing to more people.  Being strong and healthy is different than being big or growing.  One can be small and strong and one can be big, growing, and weak.  Obviously we desire the Church to gain more members but we should not compromise our beliefs to obtain that.

Well I disagree. It seems we like to pretend that we're willing to accept anyone. But, as I've learned, many people who have shown interest to some degree or another feel rejected. I suppose I'm open enough to say, "well are our practices and doctrines good and helpful in the long run? If not, we may need to consider some changes". But change should be possible for a dynamic religion who claims continuing revelation.

[stemelbow]

I wanted to report back because I did some extra digging on this.

The 122,903 deaths, exes, and name removals we had last year, was by far the largest number of people we have ever lost in the Church. It represented .8% of our total membership from last year. We were at .66% the year before with 98,876 people lost through death, exing, and name removing, which was, at that time an all time high.

So our growth rate was by far the lowest in 70 years. Our loss was greater than it has ever been, in terms of numbers and percentage of the whole.

hmmm...I wonder what is going on.

[CV75]

The Church is stronger than it was 25 years ago--more members, more temples, more missionaries...less converts, but whatever.

Will it be stronger in 25 years from now?

2014 stats:

Convert baps: 296,803

Children of record added: 116,409

Deceased and name removal: 122,903

Catch that? Our deceased and name removal figure is larger than our children added. Without converts we'd be declining. For a growing Church, that doesn't sound good. We should be having young people adding far more children each year. We're growing after all.

Considering our retention rates, our growth overall hitting record lows, and we may see some declining in the future. Will we still be stronger if we decline in numbers?

I think we can count all the individuals who have had temple work done in their behalf. As that number grows, so does the added strength coming into this world from the other side of the veil.

[Calm]

Easier to find out if people are dead or not?  The internet has made searching for people or people who may know people who have died much more effective I believe.  How much this would add to numbers (an more accurate count of dead members) though is only speculation.

[stemelbow]

I think we can count all the individuals who have had temple work done in their behalf. As that number grows, so does the added strength coming into this world from the other side of the veil.

Not all who have had their temple work done accept, or so we're led to believe. But that is, in my mind, the greatest work the Church can do.

[stemelbow]

Easier to find out if people are dead or not?  The internet has made searching for people or people who may know people who have died much more effective I believe.  How much this would add to numbers (an more accurate count of dead members) though is only speculation.

Its possible. It's possible there's been an emphasis on clearing out membership records for those who have died, but I haven't heard of anything.

[Calm]

It has been awhile so I can't remember if it was here on the board or elsewhere, but there was someone who stated they were part of a group/dept. that was attempting to track down lost members, which would include those who were dead.

 

It might not required an additional emphasis of more people being involved, but just an upgrade in technology or search ability.

Edited April 8, 2015 by calmoriah

[CV75]

Not all who have had their temple work done accept, or so we're led to believe. But that is, in my mind, the greatest work the Church can do.

While not all accept, because they are dead, the number that do accept is constantly growing, while the number that do not accept can't be any greater than it was in this lifetime. Relatively speaking, the proportion accepting is increasing and at a faster rate than those who do not. Much of teh growth in temple work on this side of veil can be attributed to the strength of the Church helping from the other side of the veil.

[Alan]

I was under the impression that children of record are those blessed and not included in membership numbers.

 

"Children of record added" are those who have been blessed (ie. are on the records of the church) and are then baptised at 8 etc. It isn't the birth rate.

[rockpond]

One thing I mentioned over on Scott's thread is that the global mortality rate is 8 per 1000. That means in a church with 15,000,000 members, we would expect an annual decrease of about 120,000 members, using the global average.

 

Given the figures you quoted above, that indicates the number of names removed is not really very large at all.

 

Looking at the church's data, the deaths/removals number raises a number of questions about their calculations/data mining.  2014 is the first year since 1998 where we have been anywhere near the global mortality rate (and this assumes the number of removals is insignificant).  Over the previous decade we've averaged a mortality rate of 0.49%.  Even though we have a better life expectancy, it's not that good.  So we assume the issue is that the church doesn't know when inactive members die.  But I think there has to be more to it.

 

In 1999 the change in deaths/removals was -0.08%... we must have been doing some secret resurrections that year.   

[stemelbow]

Looking at the church's data, the deaths/removals number raises a number of questions about their calculations/data mining.  2014 is the first year since 1998 where we have been anywhere near the global mortality rate (and this assumes the number of removals is insignificant).  Over the previous decade we've averaged a mortality rate of 0.49%.  Even though we have a better life expectancy, it's not that good.  So we assume the issue is that the church doesn't know when inactive members die.  But I think there has to be more to it.

 

In 1999 the change in deaths/removals was -0.08%... we must have been doing some secret resurrections that year.  

It appears as though 97-99 there was some overlap in the reported numbers. Something went goofy, making it appear many deaths reported in '98 were really from '97 and '99. Our best guess on those years is to add up the three and divide by three. Doing so puts the number in the low 30,000s for each year. Lower, but close to surrounding years. I'm sure part of the problem we're seeing with the last two years would be changes in calculations, or some sort of policy change--like moving away from holding onto records until someone is 110. But the figures are staggering. If we saw these alone and didn't have Elder Cook telling us the number of name removals is much lower than it used to be, we might have to attribute that enormous increase to name removals. But, that theory might be out the window.