Johnnie Cake Posted January 27, 2017 Posted January 27, 2017 3 minutes ago, The Nehor said: What I expect it is too. Again, not 100%. Numbers could drop. We are not going to convert the whole world no matter how hard we try. That's an understatement....
The Nehor Posted January 27, 2017 Posted January 27, 2017 36 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: That's an understatement.... On the bright side in the next life most everyone will be converted. They just need a refreshing and purifying stint in hell first. 1
JulieM Posted January 27, 2017 Author Posted January 27, 2017 14 hours ago, Calm said: One needs to factor in the change of demographics. Even LDS are having less kids and thus there will be a shift in percentages upwards in age. Not saying this will account for it all, but it will have some effect. I wonder if there is a significantly lower likelihood of going on a mission if outside of the US and Canada. If so, this may have a significantly greater effect of percentages as the shift to more members outside these areas grows. That would all be interesting information to have. I also wonder if there's not really that huge of a drop in the numbers of youth going out (especially with the big increase of young women going), but there is an increase in those returning home early. We just had 2 young men come home early in our ward and there have been several in our stake recently too. I've talked to family members in other states who say it's happening in their areas too. That could be a big factor in how many are currently serving. It would be interesting to have the numbers of those going out vs. those who serve their entire 2 years without coming home early (for whatever reason). 2
Jeanne Posted January 27, 2017 Posted January 27, 2017 I am wondering if there is simply a refusal to go. Perhaps priorities have changed in a changing young people..where college and choices are made in reality of what they want or see in their futures. I am sometimes seeing a change in parents and their requirements for their children to go. Maybe there is some real agency involved. I hope so. I do like the fact that the church is seeing the light in ways that the new flexibility and changes in schedules might provide a better quality mission on all fronts...that is if it is their desire.
JulieM Posted January 27, 2017 Author Posted January 27, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, Jeanne said: I am wondering if there is simply a refusal to go. Perhaps priorities have changed in a changing young people..where college and choices are made in reality of what they want or see in their futures. I am sometimes seeing a change in parents and their requirements for their children to go. Maybe there is some real agency involved. I hope so. I do like the fact that the church is seeing the light in ways that the new flexibility and changes in schedules might provide a better quality mission on all fronts...that is if it is their desire. I think you may be right about all you wrote above. I do wonder if the new flexibly announced has to do with concern over the dropping numbers. One thing I've seen is that many parents are concerned over the fact that more are coming home early now (that is SO hard on the missionary and their family). I've heard several say they feel strongly that they'd rather their son or daughter not go than for them to go out and come home early. If that's being communicated to their son or daughter, many kids might opt out of going (if they are wavering). Edited January 27, 2017 by JulieM 1
rongo Posted January 27, 2017 Posted January 27, 2017 7 hours ago, Jeanne said: I am wondering if there is simply a refusal to go. Perhaps priorities have changed in a changing young people..where college and choices are made in reality of what they want or see in their futures. I am sometimes seeing a change in parents and their requirements for their children to go. Maybe there is some real agency involved. I hope so. I do like the fact that the church is seeing the light in ways that the new flexibility and changes in schedules might provide a better quality mission on all fronts...that is if it is their desire. The ones I see who aren't going at all aren't doing anything in its stead, either (college, work, etc.). Part of their not going seems to be a larger picture of general shakiness and competency, I'm afraid. I think a big part of the early returns is the fact that, in North America, anyway, missionary WORK is de-emphasized in favor of service and spending a lot of down time on the I-pads. Our missionaries (four companionships in our building) are constantly in the church building, looking at their I-pads by order of their mission president (when they don't have a teaching appointment). I think this is a recipe for boredom and depression. Being wise with the schedule is common sense, and people have always kind of done that. I'm afraid that this announcement of flexibility is code for "green lighting down time" --- like with endorsing hanging out at the building all the time under the auspices of "planning" or "waiting in case people walk in for building tours." 1
bluebell Posted January 28, 2017 Posted January 28, 2017 2 hours ago, rongo said: The ones I see who aren't going at all aren't doing anything in its stead, either (college, work, etc.). Part of their not going seems to be a larger picture of general shakiness and competency, I'm afraid. This is what i've seen as well. The two boys from my ward who have chosen not to go on a mission have also dropped out of college after their first semester and live with the parents and have no job. 1
Johnnie Cake Posted January 28, 2017 Posted January 28, 2017 (edited) I know it's anecdotal as many of the other examples are...but as a former young adult bishopric member, I know that the church is hemorrhaging millennials. Our ward incorporated single youth 18-30 in age while traditional wards in Utah have about 50% activity...we were lucky to get 20 to 30% and this is Utah Wasatch front. I know that church leadership is well aware that an entire generation is being lost...I suspect that the lower number of missionaries serving is merely a reflection of this new reality BTW...the skiing was awesome today ❄⛷ Edited January 28, 2017 by Johnnie Cake 2
Duncan Posted January 28, 2017 Posted January 28, 2017 48 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: I know it's anecdotal as many of the other examples are...but as a former young adult bishopric member, I know that the church is hemorrhaging millennials. Our ward incorporated single youth 18-30 in age while traditional wards in Utah have about 50% activity...we were lucky to get 20 to 30% and this is Utah Wasatch front. I know that church leadership is well aware that an entire generation is being lost...I suspect that the lower number of missionaries serving is merely a reflection of this new reality BTW...the skiing was awesome today ❄⛷ since spring of 2013 we've had about 7 missionaries out of maybe 40 that have served here go inactive, 6 elders (one i'm not too sure of but drinking beer in arizona....) and 1 sister, that I know of anyways. Hopefully they'll come back though!
Robert F. Smith Posted January 28, 2017 Posted January 28, 2017 On 1/26/2017 at 7:50 PM, Johnnie Cake said: Or it could be an actual downward trend...guess we'll know better in 10 years or so The problem with such forecasting (for both sides of the debate) is linear thinking. History is oscillatory and unpredictable, not linear, and we must always take into consideration new and more efficient ways of taking the Gospel to parts of the world where most of humanity has not heard it yet. Growth in some areas is stagnant, while in others there is vast increase. The role of missionaries (service and proselyting) has accordingly been changing from the old traditional models, and will continue to do so. Fewer cold calls, more self-selection, and greater dependence on digital communications makes fewer missionaries per capita necessary. Through it all, one thing remains constant: The true nature and value of proselyting missions is in molding future LDS leaders. The mission is an initiation into LDS manhood and womanhood in the deep sense. The object has never been to convert the whole world. That would be an utterly fatuous objective. God needs a worldwide cadre of faithful Saints preparing the way for the Second Coming, and the LDS Church is doing a creditable job of that now. I predict that they will continue to do so. 1
Johnnie Cake Posted January 28, 2017 Posted January 28, 2017 25 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: Fewer cold calls, more self-selection, and greater dependence on digital communications makes fewer missionaries per capita necessary. Since fewer missionaries are required...its actually a wonderful unforeseen blessing that the church is producing fewer missionaries per member than in past years...so having fewer missionaries per member serving is actually a good thing...who knew? Spin at its very best 3
Robert F. Smith Posted January 28, 2017 Posted January 28, 2017 1 hour ago, Johnnie Cake said: Since fewer missionaries are required...its actually a wonderful unforeseen blessing that the church is producing fewer missionaries per member than in past years...so having fewer missionaries per member serving is actually a good thing...who knew? Spin at its very best Actually neither good nor bad, but simply reality. Has nothing to do with spin, which is best supported by flawed linear thinking. What is far more revealing is the broad sweep of LDS history since Joseph first formally organized the Church in 1830. Taking very small increments of that long history as normative may serve some non-scientific purpose, but is not actually accurately descriptive. 2
rockpond Posted January 28, 2017 Posted January 28, 2017 4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: The problem with such forecasting (for both sides of the debate) is linear thinking. History is oscillatory and unpredictable, not linear, and we must always take into consideration new and more efficient ways of taking the Gospel to parts of the world where most of humanity has not heard it yet. Growth in some areas is stagnant, while in others there is vast increase. The role of missionaries (service and proselyting) has accordingly been changing from the old traditional models, and will continue to do so. Fewer cold calls, more self-selection, and greater dependence on digital communications makes fewer missionaries per capita necessary. Through it all, one thing remains constant: The true nature and value of proselyting missions is in molding future LDS leaders. The mission is an initiation into LDS manhood and womanhood in the deep sense. The object has never been to convert the whole world. That would be an utterly fatuous objective. God needs a worldwide cadre of faithful Saints preparing the way for the Second Coming, and the LDS Church is doing a creditable job of that now. I predict that they will continue to do so. I'm confused on your reasoning for less missionaries per capital being needed. Converts per mission are half what they were when I served, some 25 years ago. The ratio of converts to members for that time frame is even worse. But those numbers only apply if the goal is to increase the number of faithful saints preparing the way for the Second Coming (or to maintain the number of faithful saints as a percentage of the global population). If the objective is to prepare future leaders or to have holders of keys in every corner of the earth, than the number of missionaries doesn't matter as much. I suspect there is some truth in both.
Robert F. Smith Posted January 29, 2017 Posted January 29, 2017 9 hours ago, rockpond said: I'm confused on your reasoning for less missionaries per capital being needed. Converts per mission are half what they were when I served, some 25 years ago. The ratio of converts to members for that time frame is even worse. But those numbers only apply if the goal is to increase the number of faithful saints preparing the way for the Second Coming (or to maintain the number of faithful saints as a percentage of the global population). If the objective is to prepare future leaders or to have holders of keys in every corner of the earth, than the number of missionaries doesn't matter as much. I suspect there is some truth in both. As long as we can quash the false dependence on linear thinking in our analysis, I would certainly agree with much of what you say here. Modern technology makes the efforts per missionary far more effective/efficient. However, because we cannot use linear projections to determine what that will mean in the future, we are left without a way in which to firmly determine where the missionary effort will be in 10 years, and what sort of geopolitical events may trigger substantial changes in current attitudes in some regions. What we can look at are trends which have real world meaning. For example, religious people out reproduce the non-religious -- which means that, as Orthodox Jews and faithful Mormons continue to grow in population, the nones or non-religious sectors are rapidly diminishing.
rockpond Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/29/2017 at 0:53 AM, Robert F. Smith said: As long as we can quash the false dependence on linear thinking in our analysis, I would certainly agree with much of what you say here. Modern technology makes the efforts per missionary far more effective/efficient. However, because we cannot use linear projections to determine what that will mean in the future, we are left without a way in which to firmly determine where the missionary effort will be in 10 years, and what sort of geopolitical events may trigger substantial changes in current attitudes in some regions. What we can look at are trends which have real world meaning. For example, religious people out reproduce the non-religious -- which means that, as Orthodox Jews and faithful Mormons continue to grow in population, the nones or non-religious sectors are rapidly diminishing. Yes. Another of those trends that has real world meaning is this: historically, new children of record only account for a third to a half of our church's growth. What is driving our decreasing growth rate is the shrinking conversion rate.
Gray Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/29/2017 at 1:53 AM, Robert F. Smith said: As long as we can quash the false dependence on linear thinking in our analysis, There is definitely a fallacy in assuming that current trends can be projected out into the future forever. I've been guilty of that myself. 1
Jeanne Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/27/2017 at 8:04 PM, Johnnie Cake said: I know it's anecdotal as many of the other examples are...but as a former young adult bishopric member, I know that the church is hemorrhaging millennials. Our ward incorporated single youth 18-30 in age while traditional wards in Utah have about 50% activity...we were lucky to get 20 to 30% and this is Utah Wasatch front. I know that church leadership is well aware that an entire generation is being lost...I suspect that the lower number of missionaries serving is merely a reflection of this new reality BTW...the skiing was awesome today ❄⛷ And these milenials are parents to young children or will be. The future doesn't look bright right now for the church..IMO.
stemelbow Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/26/2017 at 9:47 AM, JulieM said: In this Deseret News article, it states that now there are "currently, more than 71,000 missionaries" serving. I guess technically that could mean there are still over 74,000 serving as reported at the end of 2015 and at the April 2016 General Conference, but it does appear that numbers are lower now (or they would most likely have stated over 74,000 rather than over 71,000). Here's the link: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865671866/Changes-in-LDS-missionaries-daily-schedules-preparation-day.html Wait a second, I was told around here that the number was seasonally low in September when the number under 72,000 was given. Now we're down to 71,000? What season is the high and what season is the low? Are we still shrinking? 1
Atheist Mormon Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/26/2017 at 0:43 PM, Gray said: I prophesy that the number will decrease by at least 1% sometime in the next 10 years. Gentlemen, start your countdown clocks. I'd put (at least 5K) for even money, the numbers would be over 10% lower.
Robert F. Smith Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 7 hours ago, rockpond said: Yes. Another of those trends that has real world meaning is this: historically, new children of record only account for a third to a half of our church's growth. What is driving our decreasing growth rate is the shrinking conversion rate. Yeh, but only if you apply linear thinking, which is virtually always wrong.
rockpond Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 9 hours ago, rockpond said: Yes. Another of those trends that has real world meaning is this: historically, new children of record only account for a third to a half of our church's growth. What is driving our decreasing growth rate is the shrinking conversion rate. 2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Yeh, but only if you apply linear thinking, which is virtually always wrong. My comment was based on an analysis of the historical data, not linear thinking. If you believe my analysis to be incorrect, please explain why.
Robert F. Smith Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) On 1/30/2017 at 9:08 PM, rockpond said: My comment was based on an analysis of the historical data, not linear thinking. If you believe my analysis to be incorrect, please explain why. Anyone can select for analysis narrow periods of time, smooth the data, and find support for linear projection. One must rather take the long view, note the oscillatory nature of the data, and imagine a variety of scenarios based on uncertainty. Pew Research, for example, often captures a freeze-frame moment in time for a particular phenomenon. However, what is really needed is the combination of very complex data points (or snapshots of multiple effects) taken over a long period, and understood more with calculus than with additive logic. Like Orthodox Judaism, for example, Mormonism is a moving target. The dynamism in both makes any freeze-frame predictions absurd. Look at the real historical data and then ask whether linear thinking led us here. It certainly did not. In fact, all the projections have turned out to be wrong. Edited April 3, 2017 by Robert F. Smith 2
Bernard Gui Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 Even if it dropped to zero, there would still be millions of missionaries. After all, every member is a missionary. Increased numbers of ward and stake missionaries working with Church media campaigns could be very effective......and far less expensive. 1
rockpond Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Anyone can select for analysis narrow periods of time, smooth the data, and find support for linear projection. One must rather take the long view, note the oscillatory nature of the data, and imagine a variety of scenarios based on uncertainty. Pew Research, for example, often captures a freeze-frame moment in time for a particular phenomenon. However, what is really needed is the combination of very complex data points (or snapshots of multiple effects) taken over a long period, and understood more with calculus than with additive logic. Like Orthodox Judaism, for example, Mormonism is a moving target. The dynamism in both makes any makes any freeze-frame predictions absurd. Look at the real historical data and then ask whether linear thinking led us here. It certainly did not. In fact, all the projections have turned out to be wrong. I wasn't making my a projection. I made an observation based on the real historical data provided by the church, complexities, variation, and all. Again, if you find something to be incorrect with my analysis, please identify it.
cinepro Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Even if it dropped to zero, there would still be millions of missionaries. After all, every member is a missionary. Increased numbers of ward and stake missionaries working with Church media campaigns could be very effective......and far less expensive. From what I've heard about the success rate of the Jehovah's Witnesses proselyting programs, it isn't. And from what I've seen of our Ward's and Stake's Home Teaching numbers, it the Church ever announces that the future of the Church is in the proselyting efforts of the Priesthood holders, that's the moment I start a countdown clock. Edited January 31, 2017 by cinepro 1
Recommended Posts