Missionary Numbers Still Dropping?

[cinepro]

And then there's England, where the actual membership numbers appear to be in decline since 2013...

 

2016: 185,848

http://www.cumorah.com/index.php?target=countries&cnt_res=2&wid=230&wid_state=&cmdfind=Search

Edited April 6, 2017 by cinepro

[rockpond]

38 minutes ago, Gray said:

Hmm, I'm not sure if being actively engaged is a protection or not (we can all think of counter-examples), but there are no available numbers either way. 

Yeah, I haven't seen any evidence to support the conclusion that Hamba has described.  I was an early morning seminary teacher... very actively engaged and feeling the Spirit daily as I prepared and taught... when my faith crisis hit.  It would be tough to describe our local institute director as not being actively engaged when he resigned over doctrinal and historical issues that he could not resolve.  I have a family member who was serving as a bishop's counselor when he began questioning the truth claims of the church.

I don't see being actively engaged as a protection against faith crises, perhaps the opposite.

[rockpond]

48 minutes ago, Gray said:

We're keeping up in terms of raw numbers, but the increasing number of members per ward suggest that we inactivity has been increasing. Hard to say if Mormons who self-identify as Mormons are keeping pace with population growth or not. 

Here's a trend line for members per stake.

There was a steep drop from about 5,000 members per stake in the 70's to about 3,000 members per stake around 1980.  It's been trending upward ever since which implies either a conscious decision by leaders to slowly increase the size of stakes OR activity rate is decreasing driving a need for more members of record to support a functioning stake.  Possibly a combination.

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

We're keeping up in terms of raw numbers, but the increasing number of members per ward suggest that we inactivity has been increasing. Hard to say if Mormons who self-identify as Mormons are keeping pace with population growth or not. 

Both ARIS and Pew have had us keeping up with population growth except for a short period when there was a high rate of immigration to the US. But once that immigration trend ended we were back keeping up. The last studies were in 2011 but I'd imagine we'll see more soon.

[clarkgoble]

30 minutes ago, rockpond said:

There was a steep drop from about 5,000 members per stake in the 70's to about 3,000 members per stake around 1980.  It's been trending upward ever since which implies either a conscious decision by leaders to slowly increase the size of stakes OR activity rate is decreasing driving a need for more members of record to support a functioning stake.  Possibly a combination.

As I recall there was a strong incentive when they changed the way building funds worked to get people off the rolls for your area who really weren't Mormon. So if the numbers were increasing despite that then that suggests a conscious decision to have more people in stakes. (Honestly I think there were some downsides to small stakes in terms of having enough people for all the callings)

Again though it's hard to say too much since the incentives and needs of non-American units are so different from American ones. Likewise the problems of inactivity is quite different.

Edited April 6, 2017 by clarkgoble

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, clarkgoble said:

As I recall there was a strong incentive when they changed the way building funds worked to get people off the rolls for your area who really weren't Mormon. So if the numbers were increasing despite that then that suggests a conscious decision to have more people in stakes. (Honestly I think there were some downsides to small stakes in terms of having enough people for all the callings)

Again though it's hard to say too much since the incentives and needs of non-American units are so different from American ones. Likewise the problems of inactivity is quite different.

When was it that there was an incentive to get inactive members to resign their membership?

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 hours ago, Gray said:

We're keeping up in terms of raw numbers, but the increasing number of members per ward suggest that we inactivity has been increasing. Hard to say if Mormons who self-identify as Mormons are keeping pace with population growth or not. 

In every ward that I've ever lived in, the vast majority of inactive members still self-identify as Latter-day Saints.

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 hours ago, Gray said:

Hmm, I'm not sure if being actively engaged is a protection or not (we can all think of counter-examples), but there are no available numbers either way. 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'being actively engaged'; it is certainly not the same thing as being active or holding a high-profile calling. My point was specifically about being actively engaged in the work of salvation: sharing the gospel with non-member friends, proactively ministering to lost sheep in order to help them come back, strengthening the faith of struggling members, etc. In which case, I can't think of a single counter-example in my ward or stake.

For what it may be worth, I'll copy out part of a text that I received last night from one of our ward members who had taken the Sister missionaries out on some rescue visits:

Quote

I just had the most fabulous evening. The appt with E----- was so spirit packed. She had already decided she is coming to all 4 sessions of GC. She even shopped ... yesterday so sat would be free. Faced with the choice of A-- & C------ or the S---- girls, we prayed & all felt to go to the girls. Had a lovely visit with L--- and R----& invited them to conference Sunday. They said they would, so we'll see! Anyway i feel so privileged to be there tonight ... Sorry, i know you hate long texts but i just had to share

In our ward/stake/region, at least, we simply don't lose people who are regularly having these kinds of experiences. Which is one of the reasons I work so hard to help the rest of our members come along.

Edited April 7, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[rockpond]

18 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm not sure what you mean by 'being actively engaged'; it is certainly not the same thing as being active or holding a high-profile calling. My point was specifically about being actively engaged in the work of salvation: sharing the gospel with non-member friends, proactively ministering to lost sheep in order to help them come back, strengthening the faith of struggling members, etc. In which case, I can't think of a single counter-example in my ward or stake.

For what it may be worth, I'll copy out part of a text that I received last night from one of our ward members who had taken the Sister missionaries out on some rescue visits:

In our ward/stake/region, at least, we simply don't lose people who are regularly having these kinds of experiences. Which is one of the reasons I work so hard to help the rest of our members come along.

My experience has differed from yours.  I've watched people who are having those same kinds of experience still lose their faith. 

[rockpond]

24 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

In every ward that I've ever lived in, the vast majority of inactive members still self-identify as Latter-day Saints.

Every ward you ever lived in...

Not a single convert who wasn't aware...

Every person you ever taught...

 

I'm seeing a pattern in your claims. 

[Rajah Manchou]

10 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

I'm not sure that a fair standard given how much of the world is cut off from us even proselytizing. China and India alone constitute a big % of the world population. While we can do more in Asia the reality is that most of Asia is out of reach due to government restrictions.

There are some places in Asia that don't make official (white shirt and tie) preach and convert missionary work easy, but most places are well within reach. I've recently returned from Myanmar which was opened to LDS missionaries just 2-3 years ago (there is a fascinating story behind this if anyone is interested). Missionaries there teach a lot, but not the Gospel. They teach English and health the people absolutely love them for it. The same is true in Cambodia where the Mormon English Classes are extremely popular.

The Church could have a presence in all of these countries, even very deep into the rural areas, if we simply changed our definition of what it means to teach and "do more". The missionaries and the Church are becoming very visible and known, but for their service and not so much for their door knocking. Far more effective in the long run IMO.

Just for fun, have a look at their Facebook pages. 

https://www.facebook.com/ReanEnglishClass/
https://www.facebook.com/LDSCMyanmar/videos/825823607452188/
https://www.facebook.com/ldsfreeenglishclass/

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 hours ago, rockpond said:

My experience has differed from yours.

I'm happy for people to have had different experiences.

3 hours ago, rockpond said:

I'm seeing a pattern in your claims. 

I'm also happy for you not to believe me.

Out of curiosity, based on your extensive experience doing rescue visits, what percentage of inactive members in your ward don't currently self-identify as Church members?

Edited April 7, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[Marginal Gains]

Has Scott Lloyd stopped the clock?

[rockpond]

6 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm happy for people to have had different experiences.

I'm also happy for you not to believe me.

Out of curiosity, based on your extensive experience doing rescue visits, what percentage of inactive members in your ward don't currently self-identify as Church members?

I just finished a 4-yr stint serving as a bishop's counselor.  I did a good number of visits to inactive during that time. I didn't keep the stats but I would guess it's probably about 50/50.  Our ward is lucky to have about an 80% activity rate so we don't have a lot of inactive families. Of those who are, I can think of several just off the top of my head who no longer identify as LDS, including one family who lives on my street. 

[rockpond]

4 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

Has Scott Lloyd stopped the clock?

Do you recall the details of the missionary clock?  I can't remember. 

[Gray]

15 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Both ARIS and Pew have had us keeping up with population growth except for a short period when there was a high rate of immigration to the US. But once that immigration trend ended we were back keeping up. The last studies were in 2011 but I'd imagine we'll see more soon.

Gotcha. I'd be interested to see a new study on it. 

[Gray]

11 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

In every ward that I've ever lived in, the vast majority of inactive members still self-identify as Latter-day Saints.

Well, here's my back of the napkin math. A pew survey of US Mormons said that 77% attend church weekly. That is people who still self-identify as Mormons, because they're saying, "Yes, I'm Mormon" to a pollster. But activity rates in the US are only about 35%. So that 35% should be 77% of the Mormons who still identify as Mormons. Meaning only about 45% of members on the rolls still self-identify as Mormons, and about 3/4 self-identified Mormons are active. 

Now, that may not actually be the case, but that's what that figure suggests to me. That fits what I've seen among inactive people in the areas I've lived. A small minority of inactive members still have a strong Mormon identity, but we've lost track of most of the others, or if we can find them, they want nothing to do with us. 

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by Gray

[Gray]

11 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm not sure what you mean by 'being actively engaged'; it is certainly not the same thing as being active or holding a high-profile calling. My point was specifically about being actively engaged in the work of salvation: sharing the gospel with non-member friends, proactively ministering to lost sheep in order to help them come back, strengthening the faith of struggling members, etc. In which case, I can't think of a single counter-example in my ward or stake.

For what it may be worth, I'll copy out part of a text that I received last night from one of our ward members who had taken the Sister missionaries out on some rescue visits:

In our ward/stake/region, at least, we simply don't lose people who are regularly having these kinds of experiences. Which is one of the reasons I work so hard to help the rest of our members come along.

I think our definitions of actively engaged are similar, but I've met many people who were actively engaged and lost their faith right in the middle of it. 

[Gray]

2 hours ago, rockpond said:

I just finished a 4-yr stint serving as a bishop's counselor.  I did a good number of visits to inactive during that time. I didn't keep the stats but I would guess it's probably about 50/50.  Our ward is lucky to have about an 80% activity rate so we don't have a lot of inactive families. Of those who are, I can think of several just off the top of my head who no longer identify as LDS, including one family who lives on my street. 

Wow, that's amazing activity rate. Ours is about 30%

[clarkgoble]

3 hours ago, Gray said:

Well, here's my back of the napkin math. A pew survey of US Mormons said that 77% attend church weekly. That is people who still self-identify as Mormons, because they're saying, "Yes, I'm Mormon" to a pollster. But activity rates in the US are only about 35%. So that 35% should be 77% of the Mormons who still identify as Mormons. Meaning only about 45% of members on the rolls still self-identify as Mormons, and about 3/4 self-identified Mormons are active. 

Now, that may not actually be the case, but that's what that figure suggests to me. That fits what I've seen among inactive people in the areas I've lived. A small minority of inactive members still have a strong Mormon identity, but we've lost track of most of the others, or if we can find them, they want nothing to do with us. 

While I find the Pew statistics surprisingly high, I think their implication is that most inactive members don't consider themselves Mormon. Just thinking to my neighborhood the vast majority appear to want nothing to do with the Church. While I've never asked if they consider themselves Mormon I assume they don't. (Honestly I don't know how many are even on the official roles of the Church despite our often making sure their needs are met such as shoveling drives)

Also I think using only the weekly stat is misleading. Heck I can't even say that due to sick kids and travel. I think you should include all those who attend at least once a month.

As I mentioned there used to be pretty strong incentives to get these people off the roles due to the way funds were allocated. I don't know if that's still the case though.

[Tacenda]

On 4/6/2017 at 4:03 PM, rockpond said:

Yeah, I haven't seen any evidence to support the conclusion that Hamba has described.  I was an early morning seminary teacher... very actively engaged and feeling the Spirit daily as I prepared and taught... when my faith crisis hit.  It would be tough to describe our local institute director as not being actively engaged when he resigned over doctrinal and historical issues that he could not resolve.  I have a family member who was serving as a bishop's counselor when he began questioning the truth claims of the church.

I don't see being actively engaged as a protection against faith crises, perhaps the opposite.

I agree, been there done that. And I believe the Jack Mormons are usually not going to be affected, IMO. I know Jack Mormons, they aren't anti at all, they still believe, they just don't act on it. It's some of the most faithful, active LDS, that stumble and fall big time.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Tacenda

[Ahab]

On 1/26/2017 at 8:47 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

They discontinued stake missionary callings, which left only 2 missionary callings, ward and full-time, but I don't think they'll ever discontinue full-time missionary callings, which would leave only ward missionary callings.

But, who knows, maybe someday they might.

[stemelbow]

It's quite possible that we would have the same number of missionaries in the field today if the age change was never implemented--it's even possible we might have more.  It is true, we have more missionaries compared to the number of members worldwide than we did in 2012, at the time of the announcement, but that rate was increasing the previous years anyway.  I'm quite happy with the age change, even though it's brought on a number of problems, but I'm not sure we're in the most healthy of places when it comes to the health of the Church.  Remember Elder Holland saying 2 years ago as they worked to project out 4 years and expected the number of missionaries to be around 100,000.  That seems incredibly unlikely, maybe even impossible today.  Obviously whoever the "we" included that was projecting out, they didn't know what they were doing, or something that they didn't know about has gone terrible wrong.  I'm curious what that could be? 

I know if something has gone wrong they wouldn't tell us, obviously because they haven't.  But if the professionals (assuming they have professionals working on this stuff) didn't know what they were doing and fed bad information to Elder Holland, what else might be getting fed to him and the rest of the 12 as they make their decisions? 

[clarkgoble]

19 hours ago, Ahab said:

They discontinued stake missionary callings, which left only 2 missionary callings, ward and full-time, but I don't think they'll ever discontinue full-time missionary callings, which would leave only ward missionary callings.

But, who knows, maybe someday they might.

That's interesting. Stake missionaries were a great thing. Both to prepare people for a mission but also to significantly increase labor in a way splits can't do. I was on a full time Stake mission for a month about six months before my mission. I was living as a full time companion to a missionary. 

[clarkgoble]

Quote

Remember Elder Holland saying 2 years ago as they worked to project out 4 years and expected the number of missionaries to be around 100,000.  That seems incredibly unlikely, maybe even impossible today. 

Honestly I don't know. It completely depends upon where Holland was getting his information. Was it demographic statistics or just an unwise and ignorant extrapolation from the numbers then out?