Are we really in a new era of doubt as Stack claims?

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Also, name removals are not the most accurate number to use when trying to figure out how many members have gone inactive (which is also referred to as "leaving the church").  Regarding all those I am personally aware of, who are now "out of the church", none of them have actually resigned from the church.  Many have left and taken their entire families with them, though.

That would be an interesting number to actually have.  How many members who stop attending, actually follow through with asking to have their names officially removed?  As far as I know, that stat is not released from the church leaders, though.

It is definitely not a good indicator of whether or not "droves" are leaving, but it would be of interest (at least to me).

So I take it, then, you have nothing to show Elder Jensen coming forward within the past year to correct Elder Cook? Or nothing in response to Stephen Smoot's piece?

(Maybe you hadn't seen my response post. I've noticed sometimes you have to refresh the screen two or three times to see new posts.)

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

LOL.  Now, that is funny  

Oh no, I'm in earnest. Elder Jensen has had plenty of time, if he felt Elder Cook had contradicted what he knew to be the case, to come forward with a rebuttal.

(Actually, I don't think they are at odds; see my link to the FairMormon piece.)

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, Nevo said:

From your reports, I'm expecting to hear any day now that the Antipodean Saints have all been translated .

I wish! Our struggles may be more 'garden variety' -- like home and visiting teaching -- but they're just as real, and probably more deadly.

Or it really may be the case that the internet allows for the amplification of dissent by granting everyone a public voice and creating self-reinforcing virtual communities of what previously would have been isolated whingers.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 minute ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I wish! Our struggles may be more 'garden variety' -- like home and visiting teaching -- but they're just as real, and probably more deadly.

Or it really may be the case that the internet allows for the amplification of dissent by granting everyone a public voice and creating self-reinforcing virtual communities of what previously would have been isolated whingers.

Very concisely stated. I think you nailed it.

[ALarson]

11 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Oh no, I'm in earnest. Elder Jensen has had plenty of time, if he felt Elder Cook had contradicted what he knew to be the case, to come forward with a rebuttal.

(Actually, I don't think they are at odds; see my link to the FairMormon piece.)

I was laughing in earnest too.  You do know that Elder Jensen would not come out and publicly correct Elder Cook, right?  So, that reasoning is quite silly and useless here.

And yes, Elder Jensen and Elder Cook are most likely not at odds with their statements. I agree with you there.  More people could be leaving the church (going inactive) than since the Kirtland era, but less of those who are leaving have actually followed up with having their names removed or have resigned.  I fully believe that each of them were being accurate and truthful.

.

Edited February 15, 2016 by ALarson

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I was laughing in earnest too.  You do know that Elder Jensen would not come out and publicly correct Elder Cook, right?  So, that reasoning is quite silly and useless here..

Why did Elder Jensen see the need to moderate his remarks in a later statement if things are as bad as you think they are? And you do realize Elder Cook is one of "the 15 men" Elder Jensen had reference to, do you not?

Quote

And yes, Elder Jensen and Elder Cook are most likely not at odds with their statements. I agree with you there.  More people could be leaving the church (going inactive) than since the Kirtland era, but less of those who are leaving have actually followed up with having their names removed or resigning.  

Do you really think that's what he meant? Members of the Church have been going inactive ever since there was a Church in this dispensation. How do you know the reasons today are appreciably different than in the past?

And yet, we are in the greatest era of temple building in the history of this gospel dispensation. What that means is the Church has never been stronger, the people have never been more faithful, since the Church will not construct temples unless there are sufficient numbers of temple-worthy members to support them.

The total will be 150 next month when the Provo City Center Temple is dedicated.

 

Edited February 15, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Hamba Tuhan]

30 minutes ago, ALarson said:

... how many members have gone inactive (which is also referred to as "leaving the church").

I think a number of inactive members would be surprised to learn that you think they have left the Church. In just the past three weeks, we have had in sacrament meeting 1) a sister who last attended church in the mid-1980s, 2) a brother who last attended church about four years ago, 3) a couple who didn't make it to church once last year, and 4) a sister who hadn't been to church in six years and who was so lost that we haven't yet been able to locate a membership record for her. Not one of these people, even in the midst of inactivity, had 'left the Church'.

I've certainly met with inactive members who no longer view themselves as members, but I've never personally found them to be the majority. I've also seen those who genuinely did give up their LDS identity during a period of inactivity come back. We have a few of those in my current ward.

Edited February 15, 2016 by Hamba Tuhan

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And yet, we are in the greatest era of temple building in the history of this gospel dispensation. What that means is the Church has never been stronger, the people have never been more faithful, since the Church will not construct temples unless there are sufficient numbers of temple-worthy members to support them.

In connection with the accelerated building of temples, I was told by a Seventy that it has been made possible in large part because the Church currently has the highest percentage of full-tithe payers in its entire history.

[ALarson]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Why did Elder Jensen see the need to moderate his remarks in a later statement if things are as bad as you think they are? And you do realize Elder Cook is one of "the 15 men" Elder Jensen had reference to, do you not?

I don't think it's too hard to figure out why Elder Jensen moderated his remarks.  And yes, I know who Elder Cook is vs. who Elder Jensen is.  That's why it's not too hard to figure out .

I do firmly believe that both men were speaking from their hearts and were being honest.  Elder Jensen gave an honest answer and was speaking from what he'd seen regarding members leaving.  Elder Cook was stating that there are less actual resignations now.  I have no issue with either statement.

5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And yet, we are in the greatest era of temple building in the history of this gospel dispensation. What that means is the Church has never been stronger, the people have never been more faithful, since the Church will not construct temples unless there are sufficient numbers of temple-worthy members to support them

Well, I do not believe this means the same thing that you believe it means.  But, that's ok as we can disagree on that.   The last sessions I've been to at my local temple (over the last year or so and have attended nearly weekly) have been very sparsely attended, which makes me sad.  I've heard others report the same thing regarding their local temples.  I know that you live in Utah, so your experience is most likely not the same.

(I'm off of here for the evening, so don't think I'm rude or ignoring you when I don't respond.  Have a great rest of your Presidents Day holiday!)

 

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I think a number of inactive members would be surprised to learn that you think they have left the Church. In just the past three weeks, we have had in sacrament meeting 1) a sister who last attended church in the mid-1980s, 2) a brother who last attended church about four years ago, 3) a couple who didn't make it to church once last year, and 4) a sister who hadn't been to church in six years and who was so lost that we haven't yet been able to locate a membership record for her. Not one of these people, even in the midst of inactivity, had 'left the Church'.

I've certainly met with inactive members who no longer view themselves as members, but I've never personally found them to be the majority. I've also seen those who genuinely did give up their LDS identity during a period of inactivity come back. We have a few of those in my current ward.

Interesting thing is that some people who meet the technical definition of having gone less active don't really regard themselves as less active. Maybe they've accepted employment that keeps them busy on Sundays, or maybe they've simply fallen out of the habit of attending.

It really seems like the most desperate, strained form of argumentation to suppose without any substantive basis to do so that people these days who go inactive are doing so for a certain specific reason just because you need that reason to be a reality just so you can win an argument.

 

Edited February 16, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[JulieM]

I have noticed that many say (when talking about a family member or friend and lamenting), that so and so has "left the church".  So right or wrong, or accurate, that doesn't usually mean that they have resigned their membership.  

[Thinking]

I think an appropriate analogy for this situation is a dam. The dam will hold the water back or it won't. The cracks are significant or they aren't. Beware the threshold because once crossed the dam just crumbles while the water flows though. I don't know if the LDS dam will break, but it's definitely leaking.

[Nevo]

35 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

In connection with the accelerated building of temples, I was told by a Seventy that it has been made possible in large part because the Church currently has the highest percentage of full-tithe payers in its entire history.

I wouldn't read too much into that. I'm a full-tithe payer and I'm coming up on year 20 of my faith crisis.

[Scott Lloyd]

16 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I have noticed that many say (when talking about a family member or friend and lamenting), that so and so has "left the church".  So right or wrong, or accurate, that doesn't usually mean that they have resigned their membership.  

And there are those who have "left the Church" upwards of a dozen times.

Everytime there's a mass resignation at City Creek Park or this or that noisy dissident needs a show of public support, or the Church refuses to capitulate on this or that issue du jour, they'll do it all over again.

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, Thinking said:

I think an appropriate analogy for this situation is a dam. The dam will hold the water back or it won't. The cracks are significant or they aren't. Beware the threshold because once crossed the dam just crumbles while the water flows though. I don't know if the LDS dam will break, but it's definitely leaking.

In this case, the reservoir and dam have gotten larger while the leak has stayed the same or diminished.

[Scott Lloyd]

12 minutes ago, Nevo said:

I wouldn't read too much into that. I'm a full-tithe payer and I'm coming up on year 20 of my faith crisis.

That's not the only indicator.

From Elder Cook's general conference sermon last year:

Quote

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.²⁴The 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. Let me say again, the Church has never been stronger. But, “remember the worth of souls is great in the sight of God.”²⁵ We reach out to everyone.

(Emphasis mine)

[Mars]

16 minutes ago, Nevo said:

I wouldn't read too much into that. I'm a full-tithe payer and I'm coming up on year 20 of my faith crisis.

i mean this in all sincerity:

that sounds exhausting.

[Hamba Tuhan]

27 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

From Elder Cook's general conference sermon last year:

Quote

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.

 

I'd forgot that Elder Cook had confirmed what we'd been told. Thanks for sharing that.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Hamba Tuhan

[JulieM]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And there are those who have "left the Church" upwards of a dozen times.

Maybe.  But those who I've seen leaving now, seem to be "done".

I was just put in the RS presidency in our ward and our president just told us in our last presidency meeting that 2 of the most active families in our ward have stopped attending recently.  We have appointments set to meet with the wives/mothers of these families and we're hoping they will come back.  But the Bishop has been meeting with these couples for a few months now, and he's not holding out much hope at this point.

One of these families learned of church history "problems" from their teenage son who learned about them in seminary (mainly polygamy issues).  

Many members leave and simply cannot believe the version of Mormonism that they formerly believed.  I've worked through some things and love the gospel enough to stay.  But I fear many are leaving now for good.

Edited February 16, 2016 by JulieM

[sjdawg]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And there are those who have "left the Church" upwards of a dozen times.

Everytime there's a mass resignation at City Creek Park or this or that noisy dissident needs a show of public support, or the Church refuses to capitulate on this or that issue du jour, they'll do it all over again.

I don't believe that this number is substantial in relation to the number of people just "leaving" the church whether that is by simply walking away or through resignation.  

 

I know that in my own immediate family here are the statistics

7 Children - 4 Active, 3 not active.   All went through the temple and the inactive ones left after temple marriage.  2 of the in-actives (myself included) are returned missionaries.  I can't speak for anyone else but I know I will never return to the LDS Church.  I have no plans to resign my membership though.  I simply don't see the point and I"m not interested in following the process.

In my wife's immediate family

7 Children - 4 Active, 3 not active.  Again, all went through the temple and the inactive ones left after temple marriages.   2 of the in-actives are returned sister missionaries.

We were all raised in multi-generation LDS homes with FHE, family prayer and scripture study, etc.    I don't know if we are representative of the typical demographics of those leaving the church or not but I would say my active LDS mother certainly thinks the LDS Church is in an era of doubt when she looks at her family.

Edited February 16, 2016 by sjdawg

[JulieM]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

In this case, the reservoir and dam have gotten larger while the leak has stayed the same or diminished.

Sorry, but that's not what I'm seeing in the area I live.  Our active number of members are shrinking and some of our strongest are leaving or are already out of the church.  I hold out hope they will return, of course.  We just had 3 wards combined back down to 2 wards and just a few years ago we were just the opposite it seems (growth wise).

Where do you live?  That may be the difference (or maybe not)?

I see our ward "leaking" members like never before.  

Edited February 16, 2016 by JulieM

[Avatar4321]

5 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I think a number of inactive members would be surprised to learn that you think they have left the Church. In just the past three weeks, we have had in sacrament meeting 1) a sister who last attended church in the mid-1980s, 2) a brother who last attended church about four years ago, 3) a couple who didn't make it to church once last year, and 4) a sister who hadn't been to church in six years and who was so lost that we haven't yet been able to locate a membership record for her. Not one of these people, even in the midst of inactivity, had 'left the Church'.

I've certainly met with inactive members who no longer view themselves as members, but I've never personally found them to be the majority. I've also seen those who genuinely did give up their LDS identity during a period of inactivity come back. We have a few of those in my current ward.

So its not just my ward seeing random less mactives returning

[Johnnie Cake]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

Sorry, but that's not what I'm seeing in the area I live.  Our active number of members are shrinking and some of our strongest are leaving or are already out of the church.  I hold out hope they will return, of course.  We just had 3 wards combined back down to 2 wards and just a few years ago we were just the opposite it seems (growth wise).

Where do you live?  That may be the difference (or maybe not)?

I see our ward "leaking" members like never before.  

I just did a search on LDS.org for conference talks on "Doubt"....there has definitely been an upward spike in the last 5 years, if everything is hunky dorrie as Scott Lloyd claims why the need to speak on doubts, why all the rescue firesides throughout the world (Sweden and Boise come to mind) if doubt is minimal, why all the new Deseret Books releases on how to over come doubt....each of these trends seem unnecessary if things are as Scott claims. Seems all of this things are happening due to the church recognizing more doubt causing believing members to disengage from the church ... These tends are not happening in a vacuum...they're the result of more doubt not less

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, sjdawg said:

I don't believe that this number is substantial in relation to the number of people just "leaving" the church whether that is by simply walking away or through resignation.  

 

I know that in my own immediate family here are the statistics

7 Children - 4 Active, 3 not active.   All went through the temple and the inactive ones left after temple marriage.  2 of the in-actives (myself included) are returned missionaries.  I can't speak for anyone else but I know I will never return to the LDS Church.  I have no plans to resign my membership though.  I simply don't see the point and I"m not interested in following the process.

In my wife's immediate family

7 Children - 4 Active, 3 not active.  Again, all went through the temple and the inactive ones left after temple marriages.   2 of the in-actives are returned sister missionaries.

We were all raised in multi-generation LDS homes with FHE, family prayer and scripture study, etc.    I don't know if we are representative of the typical demographics of those leaving the church or not but I would say my active LDS mother certainly thinks the LDS Church is in an era of doubt when she looks at her family.

This would be an interesting new thread 😊

I have 5 siblings and I am the only one who is still attending church.  We are multi generational pioneer Mormons (both sides), all married in the temple and all 3 brothers served missions.  We all married in the temple.  5 out of 6 no longer believe and all but one of their spouses are out now too.  They are all wonderful, successful, great people.  But I'm sad and my parents are heartbroken.  However, all my siblings seem very happy and their kids are doing well too.

My husband has 2 siblings and they are both out of the church now too.  One of their spouses still attends; one nephew who plans on serving a mission, and a niece is at BYU-I.  All other nieces and nephews (mostly young adults) are not attending anymore either.

If you'd told me this would happen even 5 years ago, I'd say you were crazy!  All left over learning about church history info that they'd never heard about when we were growing up.  They read more and decided the church wasn't what they'd thought it was 😒

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

4 minutes ago, JulieM said:

If you'd told me this would happen even 5 years ago, I'd say you were crazy!  All left over learning about church history info that they'd never heard about when we were growing up.  They read more and decided the church wasn't what they'd thought it was 😒

Where -- specifically or generally -- do you live, JulieM?