Missionary numbers drop more

[stemelbow]

This may be unprecedented. 

Deseret News reported the number of missionaries is down to around 62,000 today (well this past weekend when a survey was sent out). 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865681342/Mormon-missionaries-being-surveyed-online-regarding-personal-safety-risks.html

With all of our past years' talks of the peak of the surge being over, the claimed surprise of not as much of a drop as previously thought, and the huge benefit of the age change and how inspired it was.  This may come as really tough news.  This suggests we netted a 9,000 person loss in the missionary force in 5 months' time.  This past conference it was reported at year's end 2016 we had under 71,000 missionaries https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2017/04/statistical-report-2016?lang=eng. 

Remember the expectation from the leadership was in less than 2 years from nownow we'd reach 100,000 missionaries.  Something seems to have gone terrible wrong. 

Thoughts?

Ideas?

 

 

Edited June 5, 2017 by stemelbow

[hagoth7]

4 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Remember the expectation from the leadership was in less than 2 years from nownow we'd reach 100,000 missionaries.  Something seems to have gone terrible wrong. 

Ya never know who might have nitro in the reserve tank.

Edited June 5, 2017 by hagoth7

[Kenngo1969]

"Down 62,000" and "down to 62,000" are two different things.  Just sayin'!

[hagoth7]

7 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Remember the expectation from the leadership was in less than 2 years from nownow we'd reach 100,000 missionaries.  Something seems to have gone terrible wrong. 

And the number might be fulfilled (and surpassed) through means that some won't be aware - which could lead some to say such a number was never even met.

[Tacenda]

Maybe it's the early age? I went visiting teaching the other day and both ladies commented on the problems in the missions. One of them has a grandson that just graduated high school and going out in a month and how the family discouraged him from going, and suggested he go to a year of college first. This sister shares this grandson with a prominent female leader in the church, or she was. So this suprised me. I guess they feel this grandson isn't ready. But he insists on going because all his friends are. 

So I think it may be the age problem, 18 to some is too young. A lot of missionaries coming home early. Or another reason is the information out there affecting testimony..causing issues. Plus the mindset of so many millennials, as far as not descriminating against people such as the LGBT.

But that's a surprisingly quick drop from General Conference statistics to now. What's up with that? 

[HappyJackWagon]

2 minutes ago, hagoth7 said:

And the number might be fulfilled (and surpassed) through means that some won't be aware - which could lead some to say such a number was never even met.

I can see how this would happen.

I've noticed over the past 2 years that there are MANY adult "missionaries" serving missions from home. It can range from missions with Addiction Recovery to Family History etc. In my area it is almost comical how many people at church I see wearing missionary name badges. They are officially serving a mission so it's appropriate to wear it, but we might as well just give everyone with a calling a name badge and call it a mission.

So depending upon how the church wishes to count missionaries, I can see how the numbers could easily increase even though it doesn't represent an increase in young proselyting missionaries.

[hagoth7]

6 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

...even though it doesn't represent an increase in young proselyting missionaries.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/2-kgs/6.15?lang=eng#p14

[hagoth7]

8 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

....we might as well just give everyone with a calling a name badge and call it a mission.

 

[stemelbow]

24 minutes ago, hagoth7 said:

Ya never know who might have nitro in the reserve tank.

I will say if what was expected is going to happen some pretty drastic changes will have to happen.  That is possible. 

[stemelbow]

25 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

"Down 62,000" and "down to 62,000" are two different things.  Just sayin'!

Thanks.  Fixed it. 

[hagoth7]

14 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

So depending upon how the church wishes to count missionaries...

What are the boundaries of latter-day Israel? 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/2-kgs/6.15?lang=eng#p14

[stemelbow]

18 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I can see how this would happen.

I've noticed over the past 2 years that there are MANY adult "missionaries" serving missions from home. It can range from missions with Addiction Recovery to Family History etc. In my area it is almost comical how many people at church I see wearing missionary name badges. They are officially serving a mission so it's appropriate to wear it, but we might as well just give everyone with a calling a name badge and call it a mission.

So depending upon how the church wishes to count missionaries, I can see how the numbers could easily increase even though it doesn't represent an increase in young proselyting missionaries.

The Church has been reporting the number of full time missionaries and the number of Church service missionaries for a while.  Those are treated separately.  The link to Elder Holland's comments presented as within the context of the full-time missionaries number--not the two groups added together.  The Church has given numbers, at various times, fo the number of sister full-timers, elder full-times and old couple full-timers.  The sum of the three are of course different from the CMS number.  It is interesting though, because a lot of missionaries who serve Family History missions, are full time, and a lot are CSM. 

[Bernard Gui]

19 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I can see how this would happen.

I've noticed over the past 2 years that there are MANY adult "missionaries" serving missions from home. It can range from missions with Addiction Recovery to Family History etc. In my area it is almost comical how many people at church I see wearing missionary name badges. They are officially serving a mission so it's appropriate to wear it, but we might as well just give everyone with a calling a name badge and call it a mission.

So depending upon how the church wishes to count missionaries, I can see how the numbers could easily increase even though it doesn't represent an increase in young proselyting missionaries.

Comical? Sister Gui and I take our stay-at-home Addiction Recovery mission very seriously. We don't wear our badges at church. We wouldn't mind being counted among those serving "legitimate" missions, but that's not important to us. It's an opportunity to serve for which we are grateful. 

We just re-upped for another 2 years after serving for 10.

[JulieM]

41 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

This may be unprecedented. 

Deseret News reported the number of missionaries is down to around 62,000 today (well this past weekend when a survey was sent out). 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865681342/Mormon-missionaries-being-surveyed-online-regarding-personal-safety-risks.html

With all of our past years' talks of the peak of the surge being over, the claimed surprise of not as much of a drop as previously thought, and the huge benefit of the age change and how inspired it was.  This may come as really tough news.  This suggests we netted a 9,000 person loss in the missionary force in 5 months' time.  This past conference it was reported at year's end 2016 we had under 71,000 missionaries https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2017/04/statistical-report-2016?lang=eng. 

Remember the expectation from the leadership was in less than 2 years from nownow we'd reach 100,000 missionaries.  Something seems to have gone terrible wrong. 

Thoughts?

Ideas?

Are the numbers down to the pre-surge number of missionaries?  Iirc, this is pretty close, but I'd need to look that up (maybe high 50,000's?)

Looks like Mike Reed's prediction is proving to be quite accurate here after all.

Edited June 5, 2017 by JulieM

[stemelbow]

18 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Are the numbers down to the pre-surge number of missionaries?  Iirc, this is pretty close, but I'd need to look that up (maybe high 50,000's?)

Looks like Mike Reed's prediction is proving to be quite accurate here after all.

I think that complaint about Mike Reed's thoughts by Scott has been resolved. 

The number was 58,990 at the end of 2012.  So we're getting close.  Church membership was around 14.7 million then though (15.8 million now), so in a way we have less missionaries now then before--less missionaries per member.  Thus it is possible if there was no age change we'd have more missionaries out there now then we do now, because by 2012 the trend was going upward anyway.  Maybe the age change has caused more problems then anyone imagined.  And thus, the expectation fro the number to continue to climb after it dropped to 85,000 was just really naïve--to put it nicely. 

2011	55,410
2012	58,990
2013	83,035
2014	85,147
2015	74,079
2016	70,946

Edited June 5, 2017 by stemelbow

[stemelbow]

17 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Comical? Sister Gui and I take our stay-at-home Addiction Recovery mission very seriously. We don't wear our badges at church. We wouldn't mind being counted among those serving "legitimate" missions, but that's not important to us. It's an opportunity to serve for which we are grateful. 

We just re-upped for another 2 years after serving for 10.

To be fair to HJW's point members often take their callings seriously too. 

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

This may be unprecedented. 

Deseret News reported the number of missionaries is down to around 62,000 today (well this past weekend when a survey was sent out).

 The 100,000 figure was a linear extrapolation based upon the surge when you had both groups for the old age and the new age out at the same time. It was an elementary mathematics mistake and never meant anything. (I'm pretty sure that was brought up everytime it gets mentioned)

I've been saying the change was hurting missionary work for some time. I hope they change back to the 19 year old age. I think it's having the opposite effect as intended - not just in missionary work but also in terms of helping the youth. I'm constantly hearing of kids just graduating, that clearly aren't ready, holding off but because of the way the pressure works, they're not necessarily going at 19.

My understanding is that the numbers were being kept higher than trend primarily due to significantly increased numbers of young women going on missions. If that was due to a backlog of women wanting to go then 68,000 actually seems fairly close to the expected trend given the numbers prior to the change in age. When you see it in graph form you'll quickly see that it was the surge numbers that were unusual note the recent ones

 

Edited June 5, 2017 by clarkgoble

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

 The 100,000 figure was a linear extrapolation based upon the surge when you had both groups for the old age and the new age out at the same time. It was an elementary mathematics mistake and never meant anything. (I'm pretty sure that was brought up everytime it gets mentioned)

I'd agree it was naïve in the extreme.  Makes you wonder why Elder Holland went public with such an extrapolation.  They did not realize the numbers would drop.  At the end of Stack's article, as was linked, it says, "As of January, though, the number was holding steady at around 85,000, and the Church expects it to rise further". 

It's kind of like, "wow...if they were this far off, this naïve, what else are they off about?"

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

I've been saying the change was hurting missionary work for some time. I hope they change back to the 19 year old age. I think it's having the opposite effect as intended - not just in missionary work but also in terms of helping the youth. I'm constantly hearing of kids just graduating, that clearly aren't ready, holding off but because of the way the pressure works, they're not necessarily going at 19.

I guess. 

"As we have prayerfully pondered the age at which young men may begin their missionary service, we have also given consideration to the age at which a young woman might serve. Today I am pleased to announce that able, worthy young women who have the desire to serve may be recommended for missionary service beginning at age 19, instead of age 21."

Makes ya wonder how you were right all along and the leaders who had pondered and prayed were wrong, though. 

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

My understanding is that the numbers were being kept higher than trend primarily due to significantly increased numbers of young women going on missions. If that was due to a backlog of women wanting to go then 68,000 actually seems fairly close to the expected trend given the numbers prior to the change in age.

Yeah.  Kinda sad.  The age change policy might have really damaged the whole program.  less missionaries going then what the trend would have expected...thus in the future maybe we'll see fewer and fewer people going. 

Whatever the case, something really drastic is taking place if the number of missionaries has dropped off so fast this year. 

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

"Down 62,000" and "down to 62,000" are two different things.  Just sayin'!

 

51 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Thanks.  Fixed it. 

No, see, you missed your cue here or forgot your lines or whatever.  This is where you're supposed to jump all over me like you usually do when I completely ignore the substance of your post in favor of focusing on minutiae, where you tell me that, in essence, I'm simply supposed to ignore what you actually write and, instead, to read your mind and to focus on what you actually mean, et cetera, yadda-yadda-yadda!

Sorry!  Couldn't resist!  OK, I got it out of my system.  Feel free to ignore me like you usually do!

Carry on!  

Edited June 5, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[rpn]

Maybe they're not surveying missionary couples  and service missionaries --- and that makes up the 9K.

 

[JLHPROF]

Maybe it's just the first stage of events:

• When the testimony of the Elders ceases to be given, and the Lord says to them, "Come home; I will now preach my own sermons to the nations of the earth," all you now know can scarcely be called a preface to the sermon that will be preached with fire and sword, tempests, earthquakes, hail, rain, thunders and lightnings, and fearful destruction. What matters the destruction of a few railway cars? You will hear of magnificent cities, now idolized by the people, sinking in the earth, entombing the inhabitants. The sea will heave itself beyond its bounds, engulfing mighty cities. Famine will spread over the nations, and nation will rise up against nation, kingdom against kingdom, and states against states, in our own country and in foreign lands. (Brigham Young - Journal of Discourses, Vol. 8, p. 123, July 15, 1860)

Perhaps sending fewer out is the first step prior to calling them home.
It's not like the world is having major problems all over the globe right now...

[stemelbow]

24 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

 The 100,000 figure was a linear extrapolation based upon the surge when you had both groups for the old age and the new age out at the same time. It was an elementary mathematics mistake and never meant anything. (I'm pretty sure that was brought up everytime it gets mentioned)

I've been saying the change was hurting missionary work for some time. I hope they change back to the 19 year old age. I think it's having the opposite effect as intended - not just in missionary work but also in terms of helping the youth. I'm constantly hearing of kids just graduating, that clearly aren't ready, holding off but because of the way the pressure works, they're not necessarily going at 19.

My understanding is that the numbers were being kept higher than trend primarily due to significantly increased numbers of young women going on missions. If that was due to a backlog of women wanting to go then 68,000 actually seems fairly close to the expected trend given the numbers prior to the change in age. When you see it in graph form you'll quickly see that it was the surge numbers that were unusual note the recent ones

 

Hi Clark, this discussion and your thoughts make me wonder:

Quote

This “prophetic process” — which also includes fasting, prayer, studying, pondering, counseling with each other as they wrestle with the issue — was followed in 2012 with the change in age for missionary service, as well as the recent additions to the Church’s handbook, consequent to the legalization of same-sex marriage in some countries, President Nelson said.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865645244/President-Russell-M-Nelson-Becoming-true-millennials.html

You may recall all of this.  President Nelson claimed the Church handbook change was by revelation, but also this age change.  If revelation, then you are disagreeing with God, no? 

[clarkgoble]

15 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I'd agree it was naïve in the extreme.  Makes you wonder why Elder Holland went public with such an extrapolation.  They did not realize the numbers would drop. 

The question is who "they" were. I rather suspect the missionary department had pretty solid numbers on what to expect. Where Holland got those numbers from or why he stated them publicly is a different question. I wouldn't read too much into it though. (I know many people want to but the simpler explanation is that someone was doing a linear extrapolation rather than working off the numbers of youth expected to go on missions)

Quote

It's kind of like, "wow...if they were this far off, this naïve, what else are they off about?"

I don't think that's a fair judgment from a simple misstatement. If they were quoting the missionary department then I'd have questions about who was in charge. But an off statement in a newspaper article seems much less significant.

Quote

Yeah.  Kinda sad.  The age change policy might have really damaged the whole program.  less missionaries going then what the trend would have expected...thus in the future maybe we'll see fewer and fewer people going. 

Again, it was Elder Holland's numbers that were against trend not the current number.

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, rpn said:

Maybe they're not surveying missionary couples  and service missionaries --- and that makes up the 9K.

 

Excellent thought,

Quote

Mormon missionaries are having a say about their personal safety as the LDS Church conducts an online survey among its young adult full-time missionary volunteers

A link to an online survey was sent by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints this past weekend to the 62,000 missionaries currently serving in the church’s 400-plus missions worldwide.

That works.  But if there are 9K missionaries that are older couples and older singals, well that'd hit an all time high, I think. 

[clarkgoble]

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Hi Clark, this discussion and your thoughts make me wonder:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865645244/President-Russell-M-Nelson-Becoming-true-millennials.html

You may recall all of this.  President Nelson claimed the Church handbook change was by revelation, but also this age change.  If revelation, then you are disagreeing with God, no? 

No. I've been very careful to note that there are other things in play besides just converts. I have no problem with the decision being inspired much like the 18 year length missions was inspired in the early 90's. Whether the situation prompting the change persists is a different matter. Most decisions are rarely about one issue but rather is about balancing tradeoffs. How those tradeoffs get balanced depends an awful lot on aims. 

In particular it appears quite clear the church is trying to rethink missionary work as traditional methods of tracking have become less and less effective. I can easily see these changes as inspired and important in order to grapple with the issues.

Now I do predict the age will return to 19. But I may well be wrong in that. I also claim no inspiration in making that prediction. It's based purely upon efficiency of conversion calculations.