Missionary numbers drop more

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

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)

We can certainly hope so.  I just don't think Elder Holland would make that type of mistake, without some support. 

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

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.

I'm the opposite on this.  Elder Holland's statement does not indicate some dumb dumb created a straight line projection if the number had kept growing that day.  He indicated it was a "we", as in speaking for the Church, "are projecting..."  I wish your simple dismissal worked in the context, but I'm not so sure.  Either way, I appreciate you offering your thoughts. 

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

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

I got that.  But I'm saying if the trend previous the age change continued and there were no age change, I wonder if the baseline number would be higher than it is today or lower. 

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

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. 

I gotcha.  So you still support President Nelson's claim of this age change coming about due to revelation through the Church?

[Jeanne]

58 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.

This is true service.  I thank you.

[clarkgoble]

17 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I gotcha.  So you still support President Nelson's claim of this age change coming about due to revelation through the Church?

I'm fine with that. As I said I have no problem with concerns I raise being considered by the Lord. As many have noted conversion efficiencies is not necessarily the most important goal in such matters. I'd add that I think the primary task of missionary work is members it's just that we, as members, have fallen down on the job.  

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour 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.

Yet another reason for me to like you and to like all of the other Guis, Dude!   (I wasn't short on those to begin with, but ... ) 

[USU78]

1 hour 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.

Two big thumbs up for your service and your perseverance.

My next older brother and his wife just accepted a 2-year call to be ESL missionaries in so. Cache Valley area.  He retired as a middle school Spanish and Music teacher a couple of years ago and his wife just retired from teaching a year ago, if I'm remembering right.

I'm hoping our health holds up as we draw ever closer to retirement age.  I'm hoping I can keep working until she's ready for early retirement (another 5-6 years).

[Johnnie Cake]

2 hours 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?

 

 

When you factor in that this number is being propped up with help from an increase in the sister missionary program...this is a significant collapse of the male Missionary program and an indictment on the wisdom of lowering the age to 18.  So much for its prophetic wisdom...I guess that some times God just gets it wrong.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

. 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.

Badges are a good way to start conversations about the value of the cause one is volunteering for and thus bring greater attention to a need, which then leads to greater education and even involvement and support by others.

Badges or other identifiers can also help volunteers feel part of a greater whole, giving them a greater sense of purpose and commitment.

[stemelbow]

Update on this.  SLTrib has reported

Quote

But Mormonism's nearly 70,000 full-time missionaries are assigned to nations across the globe, where they spend two years or 18 months looking for potential converts.

And

Quote

This week officials in the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are sending a lengthy, detailed — and anonymous — survey to its young force of male and female missionaries, asking pointed questions about their safety.

Mormon authorities want to know what it's like on the front lines for these 62,000 emissaries.

So it appears the 62,000 is in reference to the young missionaries. 

At end of 2016 - 70,946

Today - just below 70,000

It looks like we're down 1,000 from the end of last year.  Ahh...much better.  but still down. 

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

When you factor in that this number is being propped up with help from an increase in the sister missionary program...this is a significant collapse of the male Missionary program and an indictment on the wisdom of lowering the age to 18.  So much for its prophetic wisdom...I guess that some times God just gets it wrong.

Indeed.  Off of the end of year report the number of males serving missions is likely down from before the age change. 

[clarkgoble]

15 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

When you factor in that this number is being propped up with help from an increase in the sister missionary program...this is a significant collapse of the male Missionary program and an indictment on the wisdom of lowering the age to 18.  So much for its prophetic wisdom...I guess that some times God just gets it wrong.

Or the number of sister missionaries has dropped to more expected figures. The DesNews story doesn't give gender break down.

[Kenngo1969]

2 hours 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.

I hate to introduce potential discord into this thread, Happy Jack Wagon, but these people aren't "missionaries."  They're missionaries.  Period.  Would you be on board if someone were to refer to young missionaries serving non-proselyting missions (or missions that don't solely involve proselyting)  because of some physical or behavioral health challenge as "missionaries"?  I have such a challenge (or, perhaps better said, both types of challenges). While, thankfully, my first mission president didn't put this threat into action, he told my parents that if the physical demands of missionary work were more than I could handle, perhaps I ought to simply be sent home).  As pleased as I am that I served a full-time proselyting mission, however, I'm glad the Church of Jesus Christ and its leaders have begun thinking "more outside the box" about what it means to be a missionary.  That conception was pretty one-dimensional when I was a missionary, and frankly, that one-dimensional conception was to my detriment.  As grateful as I am to have served when I did, for whom and with whom I did, where I did, and how I did, however, I think I would thrive as a missionary today, when the concept of what it means to be a missionary is much broader than it was then.  

If the primary mission of missionaries is to baptize people into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, (whether they're converted or not), then I can see your point.  If the primary mission of missionaries is to convert people to the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ (which missionaries don't do, anyway; that's the Holy Spirit's job), then I can see your point.  If, however, the primary mission of missionaries is to bring people to Christ, there are myriad ways and means by which that may be done (such as serving as missionaries in the Addiction Recovery Program, as the Guis do, serving as missionaries a couple days a week in the local LDS Employment Resource Center, as my parents did, helping people who need prostheses and ambulatory devices in third-world countries, as the bishop whom I served as his executive secretary and his wife did, and so on), so I hope you'll forgive me if I don't see the "comical" aspects about who is called as a missionary and what s/he is called to do as a result.

Whether the people who are recipients of this service recognize it or not, all of the various forms of service I describe in the foregoing paragraph are ways in which those people have been brought closer to Christ.  Helping someone overcome addiction, helping someone find a job, or otherwise improving his quality of life improves human dignity and helps one come closer to realizing his full potential as a child of God.  Whatever they're called to do, these people are "stand[ing] as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places" (Mosiah 18:9).  As St. Francis of Assisi said, "Preach the gospel at all times.  If necessary, use words." 

That's not a "mission"; that's a mission.  And with all due respect, I'll side with God and with His Servants about whom he calls on a mission, and what He asks that missionary to do.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[rodheadlee]

2 hours 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?

 

 

Sure it means this dispensation is just about over.

[Kenngo1969]

38 minutes ago, Calm said:

Badges are a good way to start conversations about the value of the cause one is volunteering for and thus bring greater attention to a need, which then leads to greater education and even involvement and support by others.

Badges or other identifiers can also help volunteers feel part of a greater whole, giving them a greater sense of purpose and commitment.

Meh, Cal, forget the rep point I gave you for this!  You're all wet!  Everybody knows those that all those &^%&%$!! Mormons care about is "doing their alms before men, to be seen of them."  I'm sure Johnnie Cake will be by any minute to set us all straight on that!

[stemelbow]

I'm guessing I'll be like Bernard Gui and company if ever I get to his level of love and service.  I dont' think I'd wear the badges, and I admit I find it plain adorbs when couples are intent on wearing them all the time no matter what service they render. 

"Well I do indexing once a week for my mission".  Ok.  A great service...but...

[Okrahomer]

3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

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

Perhaps you missed this, but the number is actually 68,500:

"The LDS Church currently counts some 68,500 current full-time missionaries — however, about 6,500 missionaries are “senior” missionaries — older individuals and couples who are serving and who will not participate in the survey."

[Kenngo1969]

Stemelbow,

As Cal has pointed out, the badges can be great bridge builders and conversation starters, enabling, at the very least, the planting of seeds, if not their harvesting.  With due respect, and with no offense intended, provided no file leader has advised against it, who are you to say when and how someone should stand as a witness for Christ?

-Ken

[USU78]

3 minutes ago, Okrahomer said:

Perhaps you missed this, but the number is actually 68,500:

"The LDS Church currently counts some 68,500 current full-time missionaries — however, about 6,500 missionaries are “senior” missionaries — older individuals and couples who are serving and who will not participate in the survey."

So  ... it appears that there has been a drop of ~3.45% from end of 2016 to whenever it was they took the snapshot for purposes of the article.  Hmm.  Can't decide whether this is significant or not.  Here are the ## at the OP's link to the recent Conference Report re 2016 year-end numbers:

Missionaries

Full-Time Missionaries	70,946
Church-Service Missionaries	33,695

[SeekingUnderstanding]

3 hours 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?

 

 

 

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Excellent thought,

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. 

 

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

Update on this.  SLTrib has reported

And

So it appears the 62,000 is in reference to the young missionaries. 

At end of 2016 - 70,946

Today - just below 70,000

It looks like we're down 1,000 from the end of last year.  Ahh...much better.  but still down. 

The article actually gives the number as 68,500 making this a 3.5 % decrease since the beginning of the year (down 2500)

 

Quote

The LDS Church currently counts some 68,500 current full-time missionaries — however, about 6,500 missionaries are “senior” missionaries — older individuals and couples who are serving and who will not participate in the survey.

 

Edited June 5, 2017 by SeekingUnderstanding

[HappyJackWagon]

3 hours 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.

I'm not sure why but you seem to be offended by this. I also wear a name tag and I'm doing the same mission you are, but to be honest, I don't see the purpose in wearing name badges. Every person who serves in any kind of position could be considered as if serving a mission. Should a bishop wear a name badge as a missionary? How about ward missionaries? Young Women's President? If you read my post clearly you will see that I never called one type of mission "legitimate" and others not so you are reading into that. My only point is that calling something a mission and giving it a name badge is more a matter of policy but it often seems to be worn as a badge of honor as if the "mission" is higher than a "calling" in the ward or stake.

For example, I have a couple in my ward who like to talk about how they have served 4 full time missions. It sounds very impressive and they are very proud of their service. That's fine. But to me, there is absolutely ZERO difference between this retired couple serving 4 missions (6 months to 1 year each) in family history when they live at home, and every other person serving in their callings in the church. In addition to the full time Elders in our ward we have about 7 other people who wear missionary name badges each week to church.

What is comical to me is the status some people seem to take from the name badge as if a mission is real service and a sign of righteousness and sacrifice whereas callings are for the average person.

Edited June 5, 2017 by HappyJackWagon

[Calm]

The difference is you can volunteer for these types of missions so there is a valid reason for spreading information about these types of missions where there isn't in callings where the bishop or others decide who to call.

And a good way to spread information is to get people to ask about it.

[Tacenda]

6 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I'm not sure why but you seem to be offended by this. I also wear a name tag but to be honest, I don't see the purpose. Every person who serves in any kind of position could be considered as if serving a mission. Should a bishop wear a name badge as a missionary? How about ward missionaries? Young Women's President? If you read my post clearly you will see that I never called one type of mission "legitimate" and others not so you are reading into that. My only point is that calling something a mission and giving it a name badge is more a matter of policy but it often seems to be worn as a badge of honor as if the "mission" is higher than a "calling" in the ward or stake.

For example, I have a couple in my ward who like to talk about how they have served 4 full time missions. It sounds very impressive and they are very proud of their service. That's fine. But to me, there is absolutely ZERO difference between this retired couple serving 4 missions (6 months to 1 year each) in family history when they live at home, and every other person serving in their callings in the church. In addition to the full time Elders in our ward we have about 7 other people who wear missionary name badges each week to church.

What is comical to me is the status some people seem to take from the name badge as if a mission is real service and a sign of righteousness and sacrifice whereas callings are for the average person.

I don't mind one way or the other but it brought to mind a member in my ward that is a missionary somewhat like Bro. & Sis. Gui are, he works with those that are addicted to porn mainly. He wears his badge to church each Sunday, or he did while I was there. I wonder if they are told to do this? 

[stemelbow]

24 minutes ago, Okrahomer said:

Perhaps you missed this, but the number is actually 68,500:

"The LDS Church currently counts some 68,500 current full-time missionaries — however, about 6,500 missionaries are “senior” missionaries — older individuals and couples who are serving and who will not participate in the survey."

Yes I missed it.  Where is that?  Des news article get updated?  Sure did.  Thanks.  I'm glad they offered that clarification.

That's 2,000 missionaries lower then the end of 2016.

 

[stemelbow]

18 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

 

 

The article actually gives the number as 68,500 making this a 3.5 % decrease since the beginning of the year (down 2500)

 

 

Thank you.  I see. I nearly promise that the article was updated since I first saw it this morning.   I thought I read it all and did not see the 68,500 number.  But I've been wrong before. 

That's a pretty steep decrease, though. 

[stemelbow]

26 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Stemelbow,

As Cal has pointed out, the badges can be great bridge builders and conversation starters, enabling, at the very least, the planting of seeds, if not their harvesting.  With due respect, and with no offense intended, provided no file leader has advised against it, who are you to say when and how someone should stand as a witness for Christ?

-Ken

I ain't no one.  Wear 'em if you want to.  I can't help my reaction...well, I guess I can, but I don't do well at that.