Thought-provoking Article With a Lot to Chew on

[rongo]

Regarding strengths and challenges inherent in Mormonism, including falling birth rates, activity, long-term commitment, youth and young adults, growth through missionary work and retention, and a lot more. 

https://religionunplugged.com/news/2020/4/15/growth-in-the-lds-church-is-slowingbut-not-for-reasons-you-might-suspect

Balanced, fair, and pretty neutral, I thought. The article covers so much ground, it's hard to zero in on one or a handful of topics. 

Regarding some of the youth we are losing coming back, I think the jury is still out on that, and time will tell. I think it's very possible that some/many who disengage from the Church in their teens/early twenties make their way back later in life, but we're not there yet. 

[Kenngo1969]

I know (of) the author.  She used to work here.

[poptart]

As someone who recently found out he does have LDS family, can say I'm not too suprised that Latter Day Saints manage to hang onto their people.  I know you're not all that way but compared to a lot of others the families seem far more stable and supportive.  Something I didn't learn till I was older, it's still the culture here to kick kids, esp. sons out the minute they're 18.  I know for me my mom was always angry at my father for wanting me gone despite him being spoiled rotten by his own parents.  Most of his side is that way, rotten and disfunctional yet they sure love Jesus and don't hesitate to be bigoted racists and just plain mean towards those of the "wrong" kind of belief, even other branches of the Christian religion (Latter Day saints included sadly..) 

Considering the USA now has the highest rate of out of wedlock births as well as a skyrocketing suicide rate, it's quite the compare and contrast.  I've had jack-mormon roommates who had fallen into drugs, their families were still very supportive of them.  I've just not seen that with the general US population.  This is just my experience, take it for what it's worth.  Hope your church and families keep it up, we're about to be in for some very rough times.  So far, I've been pleased with how Latter Day Saints, more often than not put their money where their mouth is family values wise.  If I had my way, any place that wanted the 10 Commandments placed in public view would have The Family: A Proclamation to the World placed right next to it.

[rongo]

I agree that, as bad as we sometimes think things are with our youth/young adults, they are comparatively worse outside of the Church. And, as you say, there is a good "we want you back, and welcome back!" network in the Church. Still, there are an alarming number of our youth/young adults who lack competency, resiliency, and a love for and commitment to the Church. Time will tell how many figure things out and come back. It does mirror a larger societal trajectory among the young everywhere. 

[rongo]

Here's a very rough summary of the article:

1. While still barely growing (which stands out, with most churches actually shrinking), the growth rate for the Church has slowed.

2. Controversy and resignations are not really a major factor. A much bigger one is the dropping of birth rates generally among young LDS families. These two intersect where youth and young adults who would have raised active LDS families disengage from the Church in their teens or young adulthood, thus depriving the Church of family growth it formerly could count on.

3. Convert growth outside the U.S. is outstripping convert growth in the U.S.

4. LDS women are now marrying years later than they used to, adding to the drop in family size.

5. Historically, LDS families averaged 3.3 children, with 75% remaining active into adulthood. Now, 57% of LDS families have 2 or fewer children, and significantly fewer of this smaller number remain active in the Church into adulthood (only 46%).

6. Unlike other faiths, Mormons are either all-in or nothing at all. There is not really a concept of “Christmas and Easter Mormons.” So, people who don’t want to participate much tend to leave or go dormant/hibernate.

7. Unlike other churches, LDS youth and young adults who leave tend to do so in their 20s, compared to teens for other groups. So, the Church is “hanging onto” its youth longer.

8. For all of the concern, the Church “hangs onto” more of its youth than any other church. The headwinds of secularism are formidable for all groups, and the Church does better than most.

9. While the demands of a volunteer lay local ministry tend to push some away, this also forms a mechanism that works against “mediocrity” (i.e., you’re all-in, or nothing at all). Most churches comfortably accommodate those who want to be minimally engaged or engaged solely on their own terms.

10. Collateral damage from resignations is largely unknown (i.e., when people leave, how many friends and family to they take with them?)

11. The ward system – local, volunteer, lay ministry – gives the Church an advantage in navigating these headwinds that other churches don’t have.

12. While growth has slowed significantly, congregation building and congregation retention are remarkably strong within the Church. This is contrary to trends among other churches, which are seeing historic shrinking of congregations.

13. Growing internationalism in the Church will lead to further changes in church meetings and programs, and this flexibility will probably continue to positively affect the Church’s ability to avoid the mass shrinking of other churches.

[Kenngo1969]

I don't buy the argument, put forward by some, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must change [x], [y], and [z] in order to attract or to retain members (especially youth).  Change too much, and there won't be anything left for those who leave to return to.  If the lodestar changes its position in the sky in response to what those who say they would follow it desire, then it won't lead them to the place they left if, later, they say wish to return to that place.

[rongo]

7 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I don't buy the argument, put forward by some, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must change [x], [y], and [z] in order to attract or to retain members (especially youth).  Change too much, and there won't be anything left for those who leave to return to.  If the lodestar changes its position in the sky in response to what those who say they would follow it desire, then it won't lead them to the place they left if, later, they say wish to return to that place.

My parents and I have talked a lot about this since they got back from their mission. We are concerned that some monumental doctrinal changes **might** (not that they will, but that it's possible) happen down the road, perhaps decades down the road. Dealbreakers for me would be 1) women ordination, 2) normalizing of immorality, 2a) allowance of gay marriage in full fellowship. 

We agree that we would not leave the Church or agitate against the Church over these, but that our commitment and enthusiasm would take a major hit. I think big doctrinal changes like these would usher in a big drop in enthusiasm and commitment --- not mass resignations, per se, but a loss of vitality and spirit. Accommodations of society have to actually be God's will, or they will be detrimental to the work. 

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

My parents and I have talked a lot about this since they got back from their mission. We are concerned that some monumental doctrinal changes **might** (not that they will, but that it's possible) happen down the road, perhaps decades down the road. Dealbreakers for me would be 1) women ordination, 2) normalizing of immorality, 2a) allowance of gay marriage in full fellowship. 

We agree that we would not leave the Church or agitate against the Church over these, but that our commitment and enthusiasm would take a major hit. I think big doctrinal changes like these would usher in a big drop in enthusiasm and commitment --- not mass resignations, per se, but a loss of vitality and spirit. Accommodations of society have to actually be God's will, or they will be detrimental to the work. 

Every time there is an addition to the Quorum of the Twelve, there is speculation that the new member will be the one to guide the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints into the light with respect to one or more of these issues (and/or with respect to others).  I don't see it happening.  Yes, members of the Twelve are strong-willed.  Yes, there are differences of opinion on ancillary matters.  But I think (in fact, I know, as much as many people hate that word ) that present and future members are and will be wise enough to know that there's only one "opinion" that matters on any given issue: God's.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

My parents and I have talked a lot about this since they got back from their mission. We are concerned that some monumental doctrinal changes **might** (not that they will, but that it's possible) happen down the road, perhaps decades down the road. Dealbreakers for me would be 1) women ordination, 2) normalizing of immorality, 2a) allowance of gay marriage in full fellowship. 

We agree that we would not leave the Church or agitate against the Church over these, but that our commitment and enthusiasm would take a major hit. I think big doctrinal changes like these would usher in a big drop in enthusiasm and commitment --- not mass resignations, per se, but a loss of vitality and spirit. Accommodations of society have to actually be God's will, or they will be detrimental to the work. 

Curious, you don't have to answer, what would you have done had you lived in the days of Joseph Smith marrying other men's wives and marrying young girls because an angel threatened with a sword? To me it wasn't close to moral what Joseph did and members did leave including his closest friends. EDIT: I guess like you with gays being accepted to marry in full fellowship and women getting the PH, and normalizing immorality...Joseph doing what he did was my limit,  hopefully you can feel an inkling of what that was like when finding out about it. I only rant about the church on this board, to get all of my frustration out so I haven't left or really publicly agitated.  

 

Edited April 21, 2020 by Tacenda

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Curious, you don't have to answer, what would you have done had you lived in the days of Joseph Smith marrying other men's wives and marrying young girls because an angel threatened with a sword? To me it wasn't close to moral what Joseph did and members did leave including his closest friends. EDIT: I guess like you with gays being accepted to marry in full fellowship and women getting the PH, and normalizing immorality...Joseph doing what he did was my limit,  hopefully you can feel an inkling of what that was like when finding out about it. I only rant about the church on this board, to get all of my frustration out so I haven't left or really publicly agitated.  

 

I suppose it comes down to whether your understanding of what Joseph did matches Joseph's and the other parties' understanding of what he did.  Fortunately for you, when you're standing face-to-face with him, one of you will be much more magnanimous than the other of you will be.

[Islander]

6 hours ago, rongo said:

Regarding strengths and challenges inherent in Mormonism, including falling birth rates, activity, long-term commitment, youth and young adults, growth through missionary work and retention, and a lot more. 

https://religionunplugged.com/news/2020/4/15/growth-in-the-lds-church-is-slowingbut-not-for-reasons-you-might-suspect

Balanced, fair, and pretty neutral, I thought. The article covers so much ground, it's hard to zero in on one or a handful of topics. 

Regarding some of the youth we are losing coming back, I think the jury is still out on that, and time will tell. I think it's very possible that some/many who disengage from the Church in their teens/early twenties make their way back later in life, but we're not there yet. 

The article is very interesting and raises a number of issues that are important for the Church and its members. However, it tends to look at the Church, still, as a "Utah-centric" organization when in reality it is less and less so. Therefore, some of the "behaviors" that are described and "typical" to church members in Utah and Idaho, for example, are significantly less prevalent in other areas of the US and especially in other countries. I have traveled and attended Church in 6-7 countries over the last 20 years and can attest to that fact. 

Here in the Mid-West where we live now, the Church is a non-entity in the community. It is rather isolated and not very involved in anything in the community. The membership is quite small, much older and in clear decline for many years now. There are very few baptisms per years (2-3 in the last 5 years) with very poor retention. In fact, I have seen converts pushed out of the church by rude and uncaring members in this area. A very painful experience. There is a significant distinction between the "Utah transplants" and the local members. The difference is even more pronounced when it comes to converts. We came from California where the wards were very diverse, active and engaging. Here the cliquish and insular behavior is appalling and that is a sad reality. I suggest that such issues lay at the root of much of the lack of growth in recent years. In general, the "church family" in this Stake is in name only for it truly bares no fruit and it has little to offer to people. 

We are converts to the Church and have raised 6 children. There are only 2 left at home and we are moving away from the Mid-West to a larger city further West precisely  to get away from the environment described above. The doctrine remains pristine and perfect but the Saints have a long way to go. I know that issues are complex and making sense of the research data is quite an undertaking. But going forward the trends will  continue. Most of the growth of the Church will come from outside the US. I would venture to say that in 50 years, Mexico City or Sao Pablo will hold greater sway than Salt Lake. 

[rongo]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Every time there is an addition to the Quorum of the Twelve, there is speculation that the new member will be the one to guide the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints into the light with respect to one or more of these issues (and/or with respect to others).  I don't see it happening.  Yes, members of the Twelve are strong-willed.  Yes, there are differences of opinion on ancillary matters.  But I think (in fact, I know, as much as many people hate that word ) that present and future members are and will be wise enough to know that there's only one "opinion" that matters on any given issue: God's.

I don't think it will ever be a "lynchpin" new member of the Twelve. The Brethren truly do hold the keys, and I believe that. But (and more so in the last decades and currently), they cede a lot to bureaucrats and committees, and act on their recommendations. There are currents afoot within the Church office building to drive much more radical change within the Church (Ally Isom, among others), and they have the Brethren's ear (Ally lived two doors down from us growing up, and my sister is a PR professional. She has told me some things about inner workings that bother me). With one of these (speaking obliquely), some traction was gained until someone from the outside brought it to Elder Rasband's attention. He was stunned to learn of it, and stamped it out. The Brethren are good men, but they cede a lot more to the PR consultants and bureaucrats than they need to or should, in my opinion. You can see that some things are driven by things like that, and then the Brethren are reactive to blowback or reaction. 

If any radical doctrinal, procedural, or program changes do happen, they will need to do more than their current practice of representing it as "a policy change, but not a change in doctrine." More explanation, including explanation of how the past can be reconciled in light of changes, will be needed. Example: women's ordination (which many "orthodox" posters here have said they expect to happen eventually). Were the Brethren wrong all this time until now? Or, was the precise timing God's will? Why was it not right all these years, but it's right now? When major changes are announced, the tendency has been to offer no explanation at all. 

I think Wendy Nelson's comments about President Nelson wanting to make changes, and now that he's president he can, he's been unleashed! tend to not tamp down concerns about agendas, calculation, social currents, etc. If there ever are monumental doctrinal changes, this will have to be reckoned with, and there will be fallout. 

[rongo]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Curious, you don't have to answer, what would you have done had you lived in the days of Joseph Smith marrying other men's wives and marrying young girls because an angel threatened with a sword? To me it wasn't close to moral what Joseph did and members did leave including his closest friends. EDIT: I guess like you with gays being accepted to marry in full fellowship and women getting the PH, and normalizing immorality...Joseph doing what he did was my limit,  hopefully you can feel an inkling of what that was like when finding out about it. I only rant about the church on this board, to get all of my frustration out so I haven't left or really publicly agitated.  

I wouldn't have had concerns, but to be honest, I don't know for sure. I'm looking at it from my 2020 TBM perspective with the benefit of reading and thinking about it long after the fact. In the heat of the moment, at the time? I hope I would have gained my own testimony through the Spirit, just like many people had to at the time. 

[rongo]

14 minutes ago, Islander said:

Here in the Mid-West where we live now, the Church is a non-entity in the community. It is rather isolated and not very involved in anything in the community. The membership is quite small, much older and in clear decline for many years now. There are very few baptisms per years (2-3 in the last 5 years) with very poor retention. In fact, I have seen converts pushed out of the church by rude and uncaring members in this area. A very painful experience. There is a significant distinction between the "Utah transplants" and the local members. The difference is even more pronounced when it comes to converts. We came from California where the wards were very diverse, active and engaging. Here the cliquish and insular behavior is appalling and that is a sad reality. I suggest that such issues lay at the root of much of the lack of growth in recent years. In general, the "church family" in this Stake is in name only for it truly bares no fruit and it has little to offer to people. 

I went to high school in Chicago, and it is hard for many intermountain west people to understand just how unknown the Church is outside of there. Many people (in the 1990s) had no idea what a Mormon is, let alone whether or not we are Christian. This has probably changed a bit since the Romney campaign, etc., but by and large, people's experience is going to most effectively be influenced by people they actually know. 

I remember when I got back from my mission. We were teaching my sister's boyfriend (who would end up being sealed to her later), and I went out with the missionaries. Their plans fell through, and they didn't know what to do, and I suggested we knock on some doors. They had never done it before! A woman on like the third door let us in, and we gave her a Book of Mormon and made a return appointment. They were really excited. I could not believe that, in the Chicago area, they had not been knocking on doors. So, there was a lot of room for improvement even from the full-time missionary perspective. Not just members. 

Sorry your ward experience hasn't been good. We had a very good ward, although it encompassed three different townships. 

[Tacenda]

10 minutes ago, rongo said:

I wouldn't have had concerns, but to be honest, I don't know for sure. I'm looking at it from my 2020 TBM perspective with the benefit of reading and thinking about it long after the fact. In the heat of the moment, at the time? I hope I would have gained my own testimony through the Spirit, just like many people had to at the time. 

Thanks for the response.

[rongo]

Do you (guys) think that the big drop in birth rate is mostly economic, or mostly cultural? 

 

[poptart]

4 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I don't buy the argument, put forward by some, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must change [x], [y], and [z] in order to attract or to retain members (especially youth).  Change too much, and there won't be anything left for those who leave to return to.  If the lodestar changes its position in the sky in response to what those who say they would follow it desire, then it won't lead them to the place they left if, later, they say wish to return to that place.

All that I ask is you never quit having those awesome BBQ's and Luaus, esp. the ones the Hawaiians/Polynesians put on.  that's all I ask, change what ever but please, pleeeaaaaase don't get rid of those. 

[let’s roll]

4 hours ago, rongo said:

Still, there are an alarming number of our youth/young adults who lack competency, resiliency, and a love for and commitment to the Church. Time will tell how many figure things out and come back. It does mirror a larger societal trajectory among the young everywhere. 

My experience has been youth (and all others) benefit most when we offer tools and invitations that assist them in an effort to build love for, and commitment to, Deity.  Thriving within the Church is a byproduct of that love and commitment to Deity.  

 

[rongo]

5 minutes ago, poptart said:

All that I ask is you never quit having those awesome BBQ's and Luaus, esp. the ones the Hawaiians/Polynesians put on.  that's all I ask, change what ever but please, pleeeaaaaase don't get rid of those. 

We had a Tongan SP counselor once who cooked a pig in an umu (earth oven) on banana leaves for a multi-ward activity. So tender you could take the meat off of the carcass by hand. 

[poptart]

14 minutes ago, rongo said:

We had a Tongan SP counselor once who cooked a pig in an umu (earth oven) on banana leaves for a multi-ward activity. So tender you could take the meat off of the carcass by hand. 

That's how you get non members to go to ward functions, bet everything in addition to the pig was yummy.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Do you (guys) think that the big drop in birth rate is mostly economic, or mostly cultural? 

 

Economics influences culture and the reverse is true as well.  I think it is so intertwined saying one influences more than the other at this point is opinion.

Saints do tend to be higher income than the general population as well as having more children.  However, current culture and economics  in US are different than 50, even 25 years ago as evidenced by those who are able to own their own home shortly after graduating, etc.

https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-saving-habits-less-wealth-versus-boomers-2020-2

https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-own-less-real-estate-than-boomers-statistic-2020-1

Outside the US, it would probably be most useful to study Saints' behaviour within their culture and economics interaction by region (type of economy, government, etc).  I haven't seen studies like this yet, anyone have?

Edited April 21, 2020 by Calm

[Rivers]

Great article!  I’m most intrigued by the part about the the number of wards increasing along with the number of active members.  

[Rivers]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Do you (guys) think that the big drop in birth rate is mostly economic, or mostly cultural? 

 

I personally cite economics as  the reason I don’t want a lot of kids.  But maybe I’m influenced by culture and I don’t realize it.  

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Do you (guys) think that the big drop in birth rate is mostly economic, or mostly cultural? 

 

I think it's both.  

[Duncan]

4 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Every time there is an addition to the Quorum of the Twelve, there is speculation that the new member will be the one to guide the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints into the light with respect to one or more of these issues (and/or with respect to others).  I don't see it happening.  Yes, members of the Twelve are strong-willed.  Yes, there are differences of opinion on ancillary matters.  But I think (in fact, I know, as much as many people hate that word ) that present and future members are and will be wise enough to know that there's only one "opinion" that matters on any given issue: God's.

What God wants though is not so cut and dry, and TBH do we really know the mechanics of how God's will is manifest time wise? As in, Does God say to the Prophet this is what is coming up ahead so prepare yourself and do XYZ, or does something happen and then the Prophet asks God what his will is on this (dependant entirely on the humility of the prophet to even ask), the first scenario doesn't really explain problems or changes in the Church that have happened (did God just not say anything about the two times when the church got into debt, low retention rates-is the "product" just not good that people just don't stay with it?)  and the second scenario doesn't explain how is God guiding the Church if he is just waiting around for someone to ask the question, how is God leading the Church if he is waiting to be acted upon? "I'll give you an answer only when you ask it" and that brings up that maybe the anti's have a point they cause a ruckus, the church responds with XYZ and you ask then is the Church complaint driven? I assume the answer is probably in the middle