Robert F. Smith Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 7 hours ago, rockpond said: 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. I was providing a proviso on freeze-frame declarations, and what they might mean in a larger context. Not every comment or reply I give is based on refutation or disagreement, but rather on the scholarly endeavor to throw light on the facts. Having a conversation, as it were.
Bernard Gui Posted February 1, 2017 Posted February 1, 2017 6 hours ago, cinepro said: 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. I don't share your view. Proselyting efforts already are in the hands of the Priesthood holders. The door to door, street meeting, preaching, public proselytizing styles are already pretty much passe, replaced with setting up meetings in member homes, service, and social media contacting. Those could easily be coordinated at the ward and stake levels should the need ever arise. 1
stemelbow Posted February 1, 2017 Posted February 1, 2017 My parents-in-law just started a mission. THis week they've been in the MTC> They were told that there are 75,000 missionaries world-wide.
cinepro Posted February 1, 2017 Posted February 1, 2017 4 hours ago, stemelbow said: My parents-in-law just started a mission. THis week they've been in the MTC> They were told that there are 75,000 missionaries world-wide. I suspect the definition of the word "missionary" will be expanded beyond the traditional application to full-time Elders and Sisters in their late-teens or early-20s. If it hasn't already.
emeliza Posted February 1, 2017 Posted February 1, 2017 17 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: I don't share your view. Proselyting efforts already are in the hands of the Priesthood holders. The door to door, street meeting, preaching, public proselytizing styles are already pretty much passe, replaced with setting up meetings in member homes, service, and social media contacting. Those could easily be coordinated at the ward and stake levels should the need ever arise. What a shame. Most of the converts I know who are still coming are from door knocking....including myself. 1
rongo Posted February 1, 2017 Posted February 1, 2017 13 minutes ago, emeliza said: What a shame. Most of the converts I know who are still coming are from door knocking....including myself. This is also my experience. While, from one perspective, door to door is "ineffective" (it takes a lot of failures to get a success), there are two reasons to continue doing it if there are no appointments: 1) However ineffective, it is more effective than not looking for people at all. 2) People are constantly being found through that way who would not otherwise have been found (social media, through members, etc.). We had a stretch in our ward where we had several families who were baptized because the missionaries rang their bell, or talked to them in front of their houses. Even though the mission policy at the time was no tracting (to get the members to do "their job"). The good missionaries talked to people wherever they could find them, anyway. And none of these families would have been found through the new "finding methods." What is sad for me is seeing the new policies meant to coddle incompetent, fragile missionaries (who I don't think would be as incompetent and fragile if we treated them as traditional missionaries). Like every minute of downtime spent at the church, or "finding" people on their devices, etc. I think this is one reason for some early returning missionaries: boredom and depression because they aren't doing "ineffective" tracting. I think the idleness takes a psychological and spiritual toll.
stemelbow Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 19 hours ago, cinepro said: I suspect the definition of the word "missionary" will be expanded beyond the traditional application to full-time Elders and Sisters in their late-teens or early-20s. If it hasn't already. It should. But most older couples heading out aren't doing proselytizing. my parents-in-law are running a camp. They tried everything they could to skip the two weeks at the MTC. They finally let them go for just a week, because they are just going to be taking reservations, fixing boats, feeding and grooming horses, and stuff like that. It might be a number the someone who spoke has used since last year. But it could also be pretty current. 1
rockpond Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 28 minutes ago, stemelbow said: It should. But most older couples heading out aren't doing proselytizing. my parents-in-law are running a camp. They tried everything they could to skip the two weeks at the MTC. They finally let them go for just a week, because they are just going to be taking reservations, fixing boats, feeding and grooming horses, and stuff like that. It might be a number the someone who spoke has used since last year. But it could also be pretty current. Where is the camp and who does it serve? I'm trying to understand how this is a "mission" vs just free labor for the church.
stemelbow Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 5 minutes ago, rockpond said: Where is the camp and who does it serve? I'm trying to understand how this is a "mission" vs just free labor for the church. Oh it's free labor for the Church. They are heading to Washington State. It just so happen this past summer they heard about this camp, owned by the Church, and looked into it. It's run by older retired couples who are "missionaries". The Church would not run without old retired couples who aren't necessarily missionaries, as we think of them, who faithfully give of their time and energy working for the Church for free labor. This is not new. If you have spent any time working for the church you see it first hand. I can't be positive because my experience working for the church is surely limited, but I'd suspect retired missionary couples help run nearly every aspect of Church operation. In nearly every department I had contact, the Williams' or the Openheimer's or the Johnson's were always mentioned as integral parts of the work. 1
stemelbow Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 15 minutes ago, rockpond said: Where is the camp and who does it serve? I'm trying to understand how this is a "mission" vs just free labor for the church. Here's a link to all the camps: https://www.lds.org/locations/camping/sites/list-of-camps?lang=eng They are all over the west. I think the one my in laws are headed to next week is Ensign Ranch. I could be wrong, though.
cinepro Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 5 hours ago, rockpond said: Where is the camp and who does it serve? I'm trying to understand how this is a "mission" vs just free labor for the church. You say "free labor" like it's a bad thing.
stemelbow Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 5 minutes ago, cinepro said: You say "free labor" like it's a bad thing. I was once asked to figure out how much money the Church is saving by the work accomplished, in my small area of the Church org, by missionaries (And I made a mistake in saying "couples", while there are tons of couples it was also true that many of the missionaries were single men or women, sometimes widowed or divorced; and there was a crew of young missionaries who were not qualified to serve regular proselyting missions as per being on the spectrum, as they say). Anyway, they asked me back then to figure out the savings for the church if we assumed the work accomplished by missionaries was done by paid for employees who made $7 an hour (ok so it was some time ago). It was well into the millions every year, and it is true, the work they were doing would have cost the Church more than $7 an hour. But we were allowed as per our budget to give them a meal every once in a while as a thank you. I will add, some of the finest people I've ever known were those old among those retired folks that dedicated their retirement energies to Church work. I shouldn't mention that others of them were miserable, difficult people, but I will for balance. 1
Calm Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Studies have shown that retirees that are involved in meaningful work, including volunteering, are happier and healthier and live longer. I think the Church provides a wonderful service for seniors just as the seniors provide it for the Church. 4
stemelbow Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 6 minutes ago, Calm said: Studies have shown that retirees that are involved in meaningful work, including volunteering, are happier and healthier and live longer. I think the Church provides a wonderful service for seniors just as the seniors provide it for the Church. Fair addition, Calm. Thanks.
rockpond Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 1 hour ago, cinepro said: You say "free labor" like it's a bad thing. If there are couples who want to go serve in that type of mission and they knew what they were getting into when they put in papers, I'm happy for them. But I also know, in my stake, there was a certain amount of pressure put on couples to serve. It all depends on the circumstances. 1
cinepro Posted April 2, 2017 Posted April 2, 2017 Just bumping this back up with the actual numbers: Full-time Missionaries 2011: 55,410 2012: 58,990 2013: 83,035 2014: 85,147 2015: 74,079 2016: 70,946 http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/2016-statistical-report-2017-april-conference
clarkgoble Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 (edited) 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 That's a bit expected given the huge numbers in the prior years. Things are balancing and getting back to trend. The numbers are actually still a big high. That's not to deny some problems with numbers. I'm discussing that over at T&S with graphs. Edited April 3, 2017 by clarkgoble 1
ksfisher Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 39 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: That's a bit expected given the huge numbers in the prior years. Things are balancing and getting back to trend. The numbers are actually still a big high. That's not to deny some problems with numbers. I'm discussing that over at T&S with graphs. From the T&S article: "I had noted a huge drop in missionary productivity first around 1989" Finally someone acknowledges that things went downhill after I left the mission field! 2
clarkgoble Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 (edited) 40 minutes ago, ksfisher said: From the T&S article: "I had noted a huge drop in missionary productivity first around 1989" Finally someone acknowledges that things went downhill after I left the mission field! That's when I left too! LOL. Although I think the big giant bump in the late 80's was due to baptizing without true conversion so that the rate of activity after a year for converts was quite low. That was especially true in parts of latin America. My MTC companion actually was the top baptizer in history at his year mark. (When I was still struggling to get my first baptism - he had 50) Yet most went inactive. It seemed like by the 90's the church was really clamping down on that more which corresponds to a big drop in the nominal productivity but probably an increase in real productivity if we measure that by converts active after a year rather than converts. Edited April 3, 2017 by clarkgoble 1
probablyHagoth7 Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 On 1/26/2017 at 7:04 PM, Johnnie Cake said: Didn't Elder Holland predict that there would be over 100,000 full time missionaries by 2019 just recently? Maybe the church is just keeping their pow[d]er dry and in reserve to send them all out in a wave or surge 2.0 in 2019. . 2 The reserves are already in place. We all await the day when the primary children are sent out *immediately* after they have grown a foot or two. 1
clarkgoble Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 (edited) On 1/26/2017 at 11:39 AM, Peppermint Patty said: It does seem to indicate the number of missionaries has declined to around 71,000 from over 74,000. If this is true I wonder when and what the number will finally bottom out at? I'd imagine a more natural number is the upper 60s depending upon how you look at it. We were a 52 in 2010 then there was a large population due to demographics hitting 18 plus the change of age. That gave us some unusually large numbers from 2013-2015. I think we're now returning to trend. Although to be fair the numbers since the mid 90's have ranged from 50,000 to almost 62,000 prior to the age change. Edited April 4, 2017 by clarkgoble
clarkgoble Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 (edited) On 1/26/2017 at 7:04 PM, Johnnie Cake said: Didn't Elder Holland predict that there would be over 100,000 full time missionaries by 2019 just recently? Maybe the church is just keeping their power dry and in reserve to send them all out in a wave or surge 2.0 in 2019. Interestingly the same article noted most expected it to drop to 70,000 again. I'm not sure where Elder Holland is getting the 100,000 figure from. Presumably it's looking at the people who are 15 and 16 right now. There may just be a lot of them. Edited April 4, 2017 by clarkgoble 1
rongo Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 1 minute ago, clarkgoble said: Interestingly the same article noted most expected it to drop to 70,000 again. It's interesting that they expected it to drop back down. Why assume that it would be a temporary flash-in-the-pan? Why wouldn't they assume that strong numbers of 18-19 year olds would continue? Generational birth rates?
rockpond Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 16 minutes ago, rongo said: It's interesting that they expected it to drop back down. Why assume that it would be a temporary flash-in-the-pan? Why wouldn't they assume that strong numbers of 18-19 year olds would continue? Generational birth rates? If we look at the trend of missionaries as a percent of membership (click here for my chart) we can see that the age change was announced at a time when missionaries as a percentage of membership had reached a 40+ year low. The age change brought us back up the the levels of the 90's (pre-"raising the bar"). We're now back to the 2003-2004 levels. If all other factors affecting missionary service were to hold constant, I would expect us to start steadying out as we are clearly getting more young women out on missions than ever before. But, I suspect that the rising doubt/questioning that seems to be happening among our youth will likely push this trend back to the 2010 level within the next 5 years.
rongo Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 4 minutes ago, rockpond said: If we look at the trend of missionaries as a percent of membership (click here for my chart) we can see that the age change was announced at a time when missionaries as a percentage of membership had reached a 40+ year low. The age change brought us back up the the levels of the 90's (pre-"raising the bar"). We're now back to the 2003-2004 levels. If all other factors affecting missionary service were to hold constant, I would expect us to start steadying out as we are clearly getting more young women out on missions than ever before. But, I suspect that the rising doubt/questioning that seems to be happening among our youth will likely push this trend back to the 2010 level within the next 5 years. So, are you saying that that was the expected effect and outcome from the Brethren? Wouldn't they have expected it to remain high?
Recommended Posts