Another Look at the Missionary Numbers

[Johnnie Cake]

Elder Nelson claimed that the missionary age change was the result of revelation:

Quote

The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles counsel together and share all the Lord has directed us to understand and to feel individually and collectively. And then we watch the Lord move upon the President of the Church to proclaim the Lord’s will.

This prophetic process was followed in 2012 with the change in minimum age for missionaries and again with the recent additions to the Church’s handbook, consequent to the legalization of same-sex marriage in some countries.

Becoming True Millennials

President Russell M. Nelson

Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

An Evening with President Russell M. Nelson

Worldwide Devotional for Young Adults • January 10, 2016 • Brigham Young University–Hawaii

At the time Elder Nelson made this statement...the claim that the age changed came through revelation seemed like a massive faith promoting win for the church as 10's of thousands of additional missionaries were signing up with the result being the huge missionary surge.  Now that that surge is over and the number of missionaries serving seems to have run its course and in a downward spiral...with no sign of having yet found its bottom...the mileage and value that the church can get from claiming this policy change was due to revelation seems to have also run out of gas. 

Are these declining missionary numbers really what God had in mind when He issued this revelation? Could He not see into the future? Am I missing something?

[stemelbow]

10 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Elder Nelson claimed that the missionary age change was the result of revelation:

At the time Elder Nelson made this statement...the claim that the age changed came through revelation seemed like a massive faith promoting win for the church as 10's of thousands of additional missionaries were signing up with the result being the huge missionary surge.  Now that that surge is over and the number of missionaries serving seems to have run its course and in a downward spiral...with no sign of having yet found its bottom...the mileage and value that the church can get from claiming this policy change was due to revelation seems to have also run out of gas. 

Are these declining missionary numbers really what God had in mind when He issued this revelation? Could He not see into the future? Am I missing something?

Home run, baby.  These policy deals seem less about revelation then personal inspiration.  Kinda like when your company feels inspired to redo their management programs and policies, or when they decide to cut the cafeteria budget, or try a new process...or any of the above.  Sometimes it works and sometimes it don't.  That's how our human inspiration goes though.  Call it revelation if you like, but if that's the case, everyone and every org out there runs on the same continuing revelation principle. 

[mrmarklin]

On 4/19/2017 at 2:31 PM, Duncan said:

60%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%?????????????????? what?! that's a lot!!! Where did you serve?

I served in the Andes South Mission. This statistic was given to us in Salt Lake City by a general authority at the then SLC mission home. 

 

I believe it was the church average activity rate at the time. 

[clarkgoble]

11 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Elder Nelson claimed that the missionary age change was the result of revelation:

At the time Elder Nelson made this statement...the claim that the age changed came through revelation seemed like a massive faith promoting win for the church as 10's of thousands of additional missionaries were signing up with the result being the huge missionary surge.  Now that that surge is over and the number of missionaries serving seems to have run its course and in a downward spiral...with no sign of having yet found its bottom...the mileage and value that the church can get from claiming this policy change was due to revelation seems to have also run out of gas. 

Are these declining missionary numbers really what God had in mind when He issued this revelation? Could He not see into the future? Am I missing something?

Yes, the numbers aren't declining as a percent of the church. As I mentioned they're higher than they were before the surge as a percentage of the church. The OP noted that women going on missions made up the difference, but surely you're not discounting young women by saying they don't count as missionaries, are you?

To the other point, those of us who have been critical of the age change don't deny I think it being inspired. We point out the costs of course. But I'm completely fine with there being other concerns that matter more than conversion. I've hopefully made that caveat every time I've discussed the issue. However to say there are costs is not to say that there's no revelation behind it. Not knowing the details of the revelation nor what the concerns were I can't say much there. I could see them praying about what to do about kids going inactive at college but before missions. For that, I suspect this will have an effect. Whether long term it's worth the costs is an other matter entirely. 

Edited April 21, 2017 by clarkgoble

[sunstoned]

11 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Home run, baby.  These policy deals seem less about revelation then personal inspiration.  Kinda like when your company feels inspired to redo their management programs and policies, or when they decide to cut the cafeteria budget, or try a new process...or any of the above.  Sometimes it works and sometimes it don't.  That's how our human inspiration goes though.  Call it revelation if you like, but if that's the case, everyone and every org out there runs on the same continuing revelation principle. 

I sometimes wonder how the church would look if it was not run by revelation and managed by run of the mill businessmen like any other corporation.  Would it look any different that what we have now?

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

I sometimes wonder how the church would look if it was not run by revelation and managed by run of the mill businessmen like any other corporation.  Would it look any different that what we have now?

More than likely.  They wouldn't be selling supplies for at cost or free for one thing.  That is a pretty basic obvious difference.  Another one would be organizing wards to maximize the comfort and convenience of those with excess cash to spend, not effectiveness of being able to care for the needy along with those able to contribute financially.

[stemelbow]

8 hours ago, sunstoned said:

I sometimes wonder how the church would look if it was not run by revelation and managed by run of the mill businessmen like any other corporation.  Would it look any different that what we have now?

Wonder no more.  That is what we have now.

[stemelbow]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

More than likely.  They wouldn't be selling supplies for at cost or free for one thing.

Sure they would.  They do.  It is about making influence in a professional manner.  That's what the Church does.  Of course it's called Church so it can't ever appear to be in it for the money.  If it were that'd be a terrible business decision.  The business of the Church is run off the donations of its members.  Of course over the years the Church has invested that money into other ventures to help keep it stable and sustainable, but surely we know the donations of members is what has gotten the Church where it is, and surely the leaders know that.  They need to maintain the donation pipeline else it all fails.  One way to do that is to sell supplies at cost or free. 

Just realize many business have to sell things at cost or for free in order to maintain their business.  That's why we have free apps or get free hotdogs, hats, or coloring books at times. 

Quote

 

 That is a pretty basic obvious difference.  Another one would be organizing wards to maximize the comfort and convenience of those with excess cash to spend, not effectiveness of being able to care for the needy along with those able to contribute financially.

Not sure what you mean.  Caring for the needy is not really as high a priority as is keeping members in so money keeps funneling in.  Sadly. 

Edited April 21, 2017 by stemelbow

[Johnnie Cake]

10 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Yes, the numbers aren't declining as a percent of the church. As I mentioned they're higher than they were before the surge as a percentage of the church. The OP noted that women going on missions made up the difference, but surely you're not discounting young women by saying they don't count as missionaries, are you?

To the other point, those of us who have been critical of the age change don't deny I think it being inspired. We point out the costs of course. But I'm completely fine with there being other concerns that matter more than conversion. I've hopefully made that caveat every time I've discussed the issue. However to say there are costs is not to say that there's no revelation behind it. Not knowing the details of the revelation nor what the concerns were I can't say much there. I could see them praying about what to do about kids going inactive at college but before missions. For that, I suspect this will have an effect. Whether long term it's worth the costs is an other matter entirely. 

You're welcome to ride that revelation rocket all the way to the ground.  However,once you own it you own all of it...good, bad and ugly.  This is why I personally feel that they should have merely called it a policy change subject to adjustment as factors in the mission field dictate.  Declaring it revelation and the will of God...subjects the "revelation" to criticism should things not turn out well.  However in the spirit of being fair...one aspect of the revelation is that there are more women missionaries than prior to the change...so in that aspect yes it was a win for the revelation claim and if that was its intent...so far it is a success...just not as successful as Elder Holland wishes it were...when he predicted a missionary army of over 100,000 by next year I believe.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[William Jones]

10 hours ago, sunstoned said:

I sometimes wonder how the church would look if it was not run by revelation and managed by run of the mill businessmen like any other corporation.  Would it look any different that what we have now?

No it wouldn't because that's how it is run, like any other corporation.

[William Jones]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

More than likely.  They wouldn't be selling supplies for at cost or free for one thing.  That is a pretty basic obvious difference.  Another one would be organizing wards to maximize the comfort and convenience of those with excess cash to spend, not effectiveness of being able to care for the needy along with those able to contribute financially.

What supplies are they selling at cost?  How do we know that anyway when the financials are kept close to the vest?  Since we don't know how the finances are, we have to assume that tithing and contributions come in and less goes out in the form of BYU and building expenditures.

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Johnnie Cake said:

You're welcome to ride that revelation rocket all the way to the ground.  However,once you own it you own all of it...good, bad and ugly.  This is why I personally feel that they should have merely called it a policy change subject to adjustment as factors in the mission field dictate.  Declaring it revelation and the will of God...subjects the "revelation" to criticism should things not turn out well.  However in the spirit of being fair...one aspect of the revelation is that there are more women missionaries than prior to the change...so in that aspect yes it was a win for the revelation claim and if that was its intent...so far it is a success...just not as successful as Elder Holland wishes it were...when he predicted a missionary army of over 100,000 by next year I believe.

Well I'm more talking about the theology of revelation. From a purely practical standpoint I agree that they should have been more cautious. A look at how Hinkley handled the transition to 18 months and then reversed it would have been helpful. I think they really miss Pres. Hinkley's media talents. 

[Johnnie Cake]

38 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Well I'm more talking about the theology of revelation. From a purely practical standpoint I agree that they should have been more cautious. A look at how Hinkley handled the transition to 18 months and then reversed it would have been helpful. I think they really miss Pres. Hinkley's media talents. 

I agree

[Jeanne]

If the church was run as purely as a corporation, would they have given more than $120,000 to the Children's Justice System as I found out this morning on Channel 13? (Fox)

[rongo]

3 hours ago, William Jones said:

What supplies are they selling at cost?  How do we know that anyway when the financials are kept close to the vest?  Since we don't know how the finances are, we have to assume that tithing and contributions come in and less goes out in the form of BYU and building expenditures.

Well, the Church partners with BSA (and outsources its young men's activities to it), and all mandatory Scout items are sold at cost . . .  

Sorry. Couldn't resist twisting the knife with the pyramid scheme that is BSA.

[bluebell]

4 hours ago, William Jones said:

What supplies are they selling at cost?  

It looks like most items sold from church distribution are sold at cost.

You can see the prices and things offered, here.  

For example, a year long subscription to the Ensign magazine costs $10.   That's about 84 cents per magazine and they are about the same size and quality as a People magazine.  That's probably being sold at less than cost.  

Even things that might not be sold at cost (like you said, it's hard to know since we don't know how much cost is), they are still very reasonably priced.  A genuine leather quad (The Bible, Book of mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants all bound into one book) costs $75.  That's pretty cheap, all things considering.  

[stemelbow]

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

If the church was run as purely as a corporation, would they have given more than $120,000 to the Children's Justice System as I found out this morning on Channel 13? (Fox)

I guess that may depend on the use of the term "purely" Jeanne.  Many private companies give to noble causes too.  Doing so is good, but also doing so brings many benefits. 

[Calm]

7 hours ago, William Jones said:

What supplies are they selling at cost?  How do we know that anyway when the financials are kept close to the vest?  Since we don't know how the finances are, we have to assume that tithing and contributions come in and less goes out in the form of BYU and building expenditures.

There is a lot of free stuff sent to the wards.  You can certainly project costs of items through Church distribution.  There is no membership costs to access any part of LDS.org and much of the genealogy stuff is free or cost of shipping.  

Edited April 21, 2017 by Calm