Mass Exodus from Church?

[lostindc]

 

More Mormon men are leaving the LDS Church, say researchers — but especially in Utah

http://religionnews.com/2015/09/16/more-mormon-men-are-leaving-the-lds-church-say-researchers-but-especially-in-utah/

Mormon growth slows to its lowest level since 1937. Here’s why that’s great news.

http://religionnews.com/2016/04/19/mormon-growth-slows-to-its-lowest-level-since-1937-heres-why-thats-great-news/

 

Any thoughts on these two articles?  They seem to imply an alarming decline in growth and retention.

[bluebell]

6 minutes ago, lostindc said:

 

More Mormon men are leaving the LDS Church, say researchers — but especially in Utah

http://religionnews.com/2015/09/16/more-mormon-men-are-leaving-the-lds-church-say-researchers-but-especially-in-utah/

Mormon growth slows to its lowest level since 1937. Here’s why that’s great news.

http://religionnews.com/2016/04/19/mormon-growth-slows-to-its-lowest-level-since-1937-heres-why-thats-great-news/

 

Any thoughts on these two articles?  They seem to imply an alarming decline in growth and retention.

Did you read the entire "mormon Grow slows, here why it's good news" article?  The end states-

Quote

 

"RNS: You say in your blog that the good news about the statistical report is the creation of new wards and stakes, which is the largest increase in wards since 2005. What does that mean?

Martinich: Congregational growth and stake growth are the best measurements of the increase of active members. Those numbers really say a lot about active membership and leadership.

There’s a net increase of 60 stakes, the most new stakes created in any year since 1998, though there were also several stakes closed. That growth has happened all over the world.

This year, 2016, is an unprecedented year for growth [in stakes] so far. A second stake was created in Kenya last month, and the creation of two new stakes in Hong Kong will occur later this month. But despite these encouraging developments, most of Latin America remains stagnant.

RNS: So you’re saying that even though baptisms are down, the rate of already-baptized Mormons who are active and involved is increasing?

Martinich: In some areas, it is. The church in Mozambique has achieved good results improving convert retention and member activity rates. This success resulted in the organization of the first two stakes in that country during 2015.

The church has also achieved some marginal progress in some other nations with sizable numbers of Latter-day Saints such as Brazil, Guatemala, and Taiwan. Rapid growth is currently occurring in West Africa. However, many of the nations with the most Latter-day Saints continue to experience essentially stagnant growth, such as Chile, Peru, Ecuador, and the United Kingdom."

 

That's not implying an alarming decline in retention.

And the beginning of the article explains some of the whys concerning the decline in growth-

Quote

 

"RNS: The report notes that convert baptisms are down by more than 13%. Why has growth slowed so much?

Martinich: The biggest reason is the “centers of strength” policy, which has been in place since the early 1990s. There’s not much information about it, but it’s a policy where the church intentionally restricts its missionary activities to only a handful of places in the world.

Prior to the 1990s the Church would very aggressively and kind of indiscriminately open new areas for missionary work. A lot of the rapid growth in Latin America and elsewhere was due to that. But in the 1990s the idea became that the church needed to have a “center of strength” and be well established in at least one city in an area so that administratively there would be enough leadership to run the church.

The problem is that many of these areas never become centers of strength. So you have a number of cities where the church has been there for some time, and they won’t create new wards or branches unless existing wards or branches are split, which is not very effective for growth.

The church in the 1980s and 90s had pretty poor standards for baptism, and changing that has also been a huge aspect of why growth has slowed. Low qualifications for baptism resulted in a lot of converts who didn’t come to church and didn’t contribute much.

Some would argue that secularism has also contributed. The Internet has nothing to do with it: In some areas the Internet has increased growth, and in other areas it’s decreased growth. It has more to do with the function of secularism, not whether people have information about the church that is negative or incorrect."

 

That doesn't sound very alarming either.

[lostindc]

11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Did you read the entire "mormon Grow slows, here why it's good news" article?  The end states-

That's not implying an alarming decline in retention.

And the beginning of the article explains some of the whys concerning the decline in growth-

That doesn't sound very alarming either.

I guess I am wrong.  These types of stories are alarming to me, but I have been wrong many times previously.  I always believed we would bring the world His truth, instead of declining in retention and growth rates.  

[James Tunney]

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

First, I would say that your opinion that religion is "pure speculation" is pure speculation.  I personally don't see a problem with "many different interpretations" as a result of spiritual ("emotional") validation.  It is all part of the process of "line upon line..." 

You asked what is compelling about secularism.  Dictionary.com defines it as: 

1.

secular spirit or tendency, especially a system of political or social philosophy that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship.

2.

the view that public education and other matters of civil policy should be conducted without the introduction of a religious element.

 

Secularists want problems solved based on rational means without interference from religious myth, so science definitely plays apart.

[James Tunney]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

1 Nephi 8:26-28

You seem pretty thin skinned.

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, lostindc said:

I guess I am wrong.  These types of stories are alarming to me, but I have been wrong many times previously.  I always believed we would bring the world His truth, instead of declining in retention and growth rates.  

Bringing the world His truth, and having people accept and embrace it, are two different things.

[stemelbow]

Quote

Martinich: Congregational growth and stake growth are the best measurements of the increase of active members. Those numbers really say a lot about active membership and leadership.

Well except if we were able to see the actual activity rates themselves, of course.  I would add, though, a one year spike in increase of congregations doesn't quite get us over any humps, nor can it conclusively say much about activity rates.  We probably should expect one year spikes now and then, though.  The church grows, members increase in areas, once that area reaches a certain point of increase, boom, new congregations.  It could be a result of growth in areas over a long period of time...so it's hard to be so conclusive.  It'll certainly be interesting to see how it goes for the next few years though. 

It's interesting when we see this in the Church though.  I also think he missed the mark on the missionaries.  It's true there was increase from before the surge, but if you compare the current number to 20 years ago, and factor in how many members and how many men vs women were on missions....it's quite interesting to see what happens.  Even at the height of the surge we had, as a rate, more missionaries serving in 1996 than we do today.  Of course there were far more men serving back then then there are today.  So we have seen an increase in young women serving, as a rate, but a decrease in young men, which means the decrease is quite substantial. 

[Oliver_Cowdery]

39 minutes ago, James Tunney said:

You seem pretty thin skinned.

Na, its all in good fun.  Scott was just playing along with my self deprecating joke.

Edited December 9, 2016 by Oliver_Cowdery

[pogi]

2 hours ago, James Tunney said:

You asked what is compelling about secularism. 

CFR

[James Tunney]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

CFR

Please look at your post from 6 or 7 hours ago.  That is where you restated your question about what is compelling about secularism.  Anyway, why don't you look into secularism yourself?  You might find what you're after.

[bcuzbcuz]

19 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I've never heard of it. Good?

 

An excellent read. The author won the Nobel prize in Economics. If I remember correctly he is a pschologist but his ideas about decision making, based on how people reach decisions by our selections of fast thinking versus slow thinking, gained notice in economics.

"Loss aversion" is key in decision making, as well as we have an emotional decision bias that focuses on available evidence and ignores evidence not readily available. Kahneman called it "What you see is all there is". But he says it much better than I do

[Five Solas]

On 12/9/2016 at 6:51 AM, pogi said:

Unless Calvin and Luther were Mormons (i.e. God's one true religion ), I am not sure what this has to do with his question or my answer. 

My point (which I'll concede was poorly made) is that beer is not a reason to choose "secularism."  The Christian Church as a long history with the beverage, as the Reformers would attest.

And to Okrahomer's point--John Piper doesn't make this a close-handed issue in his church.  Members can partake, his strong personal opinion notwithstanding.  

--Erik 

 

[pogi]

16 hours ago, James Tunney said:

Please look at your post from 6 or 7 hours ago.  That is where you restated your question about what is compelling about secularism.  Anyway, why don't you look into secularism yourself?  You might find what you're after.

I restated Happy's question and my response to it.  I never asked that question. 

The cool thing about Mormonism is that we are taught to seek out truth in every belief system.  I don't reject secularism completely, there is truth even in secularism. But as far as finding what I am after:

John 6:68

John 14:27

Romans 12:2

John 18:36

I think it is clear that what I am after is not of this world. So, secularism just doesn't make the cut for me. 

Edited December 10, 2016 by pogi

[Okrahomer]

9 hours ago, Five Solas said:

And to Okrahomer's point--John Piper doesn't make this a close-handed issue in his church.  Members can partake, his strong personal opinion notwithstanding.  

--Erik 

 

My apologies, Erik.  My point was not directed to the church membership question.  It was just an observation that your approach to alcohol consumption seems inconsistent with the approach taken by those you consider to be your teachers.