Church Growth Rate, Latest Statistics

[Spaced_Out]

Reading all these posts about YM struggling about a decision to serve a mission is very weird to me. I was baptised at 14yo then after school had to do 2 years conscription in the military - then put in my mission papers. My parents took legal council to sue the church to prevent me from going on a mission so had to wait till I was 21, and funded my own mission. I had two very different mission presidents but just made it work.
We have missionaries in our ward and they are excellent - way better than I was, they are doing well.

I think we are all drowning in the sins and abominations around us and can't see the forest through the trees.

[JustDan]

All I have are anecdotes, but my children are right in the mission-age group now, and this is a very sensitive topic in my family right now. My son said that half the missionaries who went home with him were going home early, including my son, who has since left the church because of his mission experience. My other son isn't wanting to go now, because of that.

Another missionary I'm close to has seen similar rates of early departure in his mission. He's got about 6 months left before he comes home, and he's the only person still out from his MTC group. They've all gone home early, and this elder very nearly quit out of discouragement last month.

Judging from the amount of attention the church seems to be giving to missionaries coming home early, I suspect this is pretty widespread. For my family personally, though, it's been an unmitigated disaster.

The news that so many serving missionaries are leaving their missions comes as a surprise to me. I'd not heard of this. We have two missionaries serving from our ward right now, and both are having enjoyable missions through which they are growing as individuals.

I am however aware that in my stake, one missionary returned after only a week in the mission field (having spent 3 months learning the language in MTC), and one other (a friend to this guy) had his mission papers in, and then pulled out before the call came. There is in my mind broadly a difference in the individuals who serve faithfully and those who do not complete a mission. There are always individual cases that do not tally like this, but there are of course many individuals who serve missions who are not ready to serve. Many do not have the testimony. Many are not ready for the hard work.

I served a mission some 15 years ago. I served in England. It is no tougher to serve a mission now than it was then.. and England is hardly a field white and ready to harvest. ;) Yet, towards the end of my mission, I discovered that the Mission Doctor had told the President that 50% of the missionaries were suffering from depression. In fact, a previous companion of mine actually called me to tell me he wanted to go home, and I spent some time persuading him to carry on. He did, and finished his mission as normal.

What was this depression? In my mind, in most cases nothing. Yes, there is a rare chemical depression, but most cases of depression are self induced and are simply a matter of 'feeling down'. Why would someone feel down? Generally because of rejection. The biggest problem I detected is that many missionaries were not ready to face rejection. It came as a shock to them. They expect baptisms.. but when they struggle to baptise they get upset. But go home? No way!!

When I served my mission, I had no interest in baptisms. Zero. Nothing. I did not teach to baptise, I taught to convert and to change lives. I served to plant seeds in hope that at some future day, these seeds would grow and enable that person to receive the Lord in their life. I set no goals. Every meeting, I would not set goals. When I served as District Leader, I ensured my District (including Zone Leaders) had no goals. We served with no baptism numbers to reach. We had a fantastic time serving because we wanted to serve, and teaching through the Spirit.

If missionaries are serving and returning home, we need to look at how prepared they were in the first place, and what was their expectation. A mission is hard. They need to know that. They need to endure that.

[JustDan]

My mission president's first instruction to me when I arrived was to "lie to the members. They'll ask you how long you've been out and if you tell them that you're new to the mission, then they won't trust you with their nonmember friends because you're too inexperienced."

I was still under the hypnotism of the MTC that says "if you follow mission rules, you will have baptisms. If you break mission rules, God will not trust you with his children and so you won't have baptisms." So my 1st dinner appointment with members, I did exactly what the MP told me - I flat out lied about being new to the mission.

By the time dinner was over, I realized what I had done, apologized to the members and explained everything. They were bothered about the lie and it set the tone for the rest of my mission. I realized that just because a leader says it, does not make it true or right. That mission president later threatened to send me home, but that's a whole other story.

The point is, at 18 or 19 yrs of age, I wouldn't have had that clarity of thought in order to recognize that my MP was wrong. I think so many missionaries are too heavily indoctrinated to follow all those ridiculous rules that have nothing to do with righteousness, having the Spirit, or teaching people about Christ. The missionaries are driven to focus so much on these rules, which are nearly impossible to keep 100%, and so when they don't have baptisms, they're told it's their own fault.
It's no wonder they have anxiety.

Interesting story. I had similar in that our Mission President basically said the same thing. His line was "just under a year" or "just over a year". The idea was the same - if you tell a member you are new to the Mission, they won't trust you. If they know you are going home, they won't trust you and will talk to you about home.

I immediately refused to follow that council. I too feel that it is a dishonest approach, and would rather the member judge me how they wish - having known truth.

The rest of my mission followed a similar plan. I would often challenge my Mission Presidents when given council that I felt was wrong - and no surprise my Mission Presidents didn't tend to like me much. But, I was always open and honest with them - even to the point of flat out refusing to follow one bit of council to the MP's face. Not that I was disobedient as a missionary, but when something was wrong, I refused to do it.

Take this as an example of how silly things became:
When the world faced financial difficulties, the church too began to cut back. It was determined that one way of saving costs was to cut down on the use of our telephones. So, we were instructed to use the telephone/mobile for no more than 10 minutes per day. We actually received "training" from our Zone Leaders and AP's on how to be abrupt in phonecalls... !! Quickly make the appointments and get off the phone. Ridiculous.

[h_p]

What was this depression? In my mind, in most cases nothing. Yes, there is a rare chemical depression, but most cases of depression are self induced and are simply a matter of 'feeling down'.

Spoken like someone who really has no idea what it's like. If you're willing to take some advice here, I'd beg you not to tell these kinds of things to someone who truly is suffering from depression. Telling them they're just "feeling down" and should just "snap out of it" or "have more faith" only makes it worse. I know people mean well, but a person really can't understand it until they've been through it themselves.

[JustDan]

What was this depression? In my mind, in most cases nothing. Yes, there is a rare chemical depression, but most cases of depression are self induced and are simply a matter of 'feeling down'.

Spoken like someone who really has no idea what it's like. If you're willing to take some advice here, I'd beg you not to tell these kinds of things to someone who truly is suffering from depression. Telling them they're just "feeling down" and should just "snap out of it" or "have more faith" only makes it worse. I know people mean well, but a person really can't understand it until they've been through it themselves.

Only if they have true depression - which is the minority.

In our Western society, the "depression" label is thrown around everywhere. Heck, I have had bad times and could claim to have been "depressed". However, I wasn't. I just had a bad time.

Why is depression on the increase? Because people consider themselves depressed. Like I said, 50% of the missionaries in my mission were suffering from depression - according to the Mission Doctor. Does that sound true? In a lot of cases, depression is a choice. It is a state of mind. Sorry that that doesn't fit with the current sentiments among our 50% depressed world.

Go to Nigeria and find the people suffering from depression. Huge numbers of people there are struggling to make ends meet and go without many basics we take for granted. Based on our Western depression, 90% of Nigerians would be depressed. But they are not - because they choose to find a way through it. ;)

[Rose Garden]

His worry is that he won't be able to find a good LDS girl to marry if he doesn't serve. Poor kid feels like he's being crushed from both sides. While he hasn't come outright and said it, some of the comments he's made make it sound like he feels like his only option is to just leave the church once he's graduated and on his own.

I really feel for this generation growing up right now...as much as people like to gripe about the millennials, the youth are facing an incredibly wicked world and the crushing peer pressure that goes along with that.

My hope is your son realizes that there are many good LDS girls that will see his great qualities and that being a RM doesn't always make a guy the "perfect catch". What impressed me when I met my husband was his love of family, work ethic, artistic talent, spirituality​, personality and the great way he treated me on our dates (not to mention he's super cute, lol). Him coming home early from his mission was not a concern in any way, shape or form.

I missed this when it was first posted; I guess I skimmed a little too much.

HP, tell your son that this isn't anything new. I joined the church decades ago, and almost immediately was hit with a lot of negativity from girls because I figured that not growing up in the church exempted me from the principle of going on a mission at 19. I recall some girls had this thing where they would sit with a guy while talking and find a way to brush his thigh to see if he was wearing garments. I had a lot I was dealing with as a new convert, and this didn't push me away from the church but it really did push me away from the dating scene.

It got even worse when, just over six months after I was baptized and less than three months before the end of the year, a Bishop told me that he wanted me to be on a mission before the end of the year. I was shocked and hurt. I was so excited going into his office and *finally* getting a calling! I was so naive that I was really hoping he would call me to be a home teacher! But I knew that there was no way this was an inspired "calling" because the church policy said that I had to be a member for a full year before I could become a missionary, and I interpreted his "calling" as a way of saying he didn't want me in his ward. I didn't attend that ward again until after that Bishop was released.

I would suggest encouraging your son to get away from the church pressures. Only when the pressure was completely off of me was I able to be persuaded by the Holy Ghost that I was supposed to go on a mission. I went reluctantly, thinking of the calling as orders and the mission as a tour of duty. For much of my mission I just went through the motions, but somewhere in the experience I started a tremendous growth and today I am glad that I served.

My husband didn't serve a mission, he joined the church a few months before his 19th birthday and didn't go. He was so excited when a few years later he got to hear Elder Scott speak in person to the YSA. He was VERY surprised, however, to hear Elder Scott encourage the sisters to only marry a RM. My husband had no idea that this was part of Mormon culture. So he just accepted the idea that he'd never marry - he didn't want to marry outside the temple, but apparently no LDS girl should even consider him.

When I got off my mission, I was very clearly told by the spirit that it was time for me to meet my future husband. The spirit literally led me to where he was, and I followed incredibly clear promptings to date him. When I found out he wasn't an RM, i decided to break up with him. (really shallow, I know, but hey, I thought it was the right thing).

I cannot tell you how hard heaven worked to get us together. It was one spiritual miracle after another- I felt like God had given the angels permission to break all the rules just to convince me that I was supposed to marry this guy. But I still resisted. Finally the YSA branch pres. confided to me that none of the other guys would even ask me out because they, too, thought I belonged to this guy. My branch pres asked
"What's the problem with him?"

I replied:"I wanted to marry a RM"

He thought a moment and by inspiration said "I think one RM is enough for a family."

That did it. We have been living happily ever after since.

My point is h_p: Let your son know that he should serve a mission only for the right reasons and not out of fear of never finding a good LDS wife. If he chooses not to serve a traditional LDS mission, but he remains true to Christ, then the Lord will work out the marriage situation. The Lord does not require His daughters to marry RMs and He will make sure your son's future wife knows that.

I second this advice. I have been in situations where it seems that there is no viable option for me to do what I felt was right. And yet I decided to do what I felt was right anyway and had the Lord miraculously set everything straight for me. I would encourage you to remind your son of the power of God and his mercy and love and teach him to trust in that. The Lord can overcome all the foolishness of mankind.

[Thinker]

So sorry to see the struggles your son and family are dealing with, h_p Although I suspect I know the answer...what is causing so many missionaries to come home early?

My mom and step dad are serving in a mission office in Canada and she tells me nearly every week that another missionary (or three) went home. The cause is nearly always anxiety. The office is near lds social services and she's shocked at how many missionaries need those services. She said it feels like Satan is working extra hard to exploit their weaknesses and the poor missionaries blame themselves when they really shouldn't. Many of them are affected by problems at home.
At a recent scout training meeting they quoted some stats (wish I had them) saying the same thing, most missionaries leave because of mental illness, then medical, then morality problems.

Good point and I know of some who have had similar reasons for coming home early.

I really wish that all missionaries learned to spot and correct cognitive distortions https://www.apsu.edu/sites/apsu.edu/fil ... TIVE_0.pdf - it would help them be better people and be better able to teach by example - how to think and feel as God would have us.

Also, most American diets are so bad that many common foods are BANNED in other countries. We're poisoning ourselves, which causes us to need more meds, (more money for those in the pharmaceutical field), which needs more meds for the side effects of those meds... and the vicious cycle continues. Meds have their purpose for sure, but they're so often overused, and just as alcohol & other addictions, they prevent us from thinking right in order to correct problems as they arise.

[Onsdag]

Here's a comparison of the number of new converts per new ward created each year (new converts / new wards) since 2001:
2001: 1927
2002: 5542.8
2003: 2805.4
2004: 671.1
2005: 683.6
2006: 793.1
2007: 924.4
2008: 1115.3
2009: 1004.3
2010: 1299.2
2011: 2499
2012: 1483.2
2013: 1253.4
2014: 788.9
2015: 662.9
2016: 861.9

The last 3 years seems to be trending toward smaller wards, if this ratio has any meaning at all, but I suspect this ratio has as much to do with distribution of new converts as it does a change in desired ward size.

I'm not sure how you're justifying your conclusions based upon those statistics. To me I'm not seeing a downwards trend; rather, I'm seeing cyclical changes. I color coded the numbers to help visualize this better. Green is high numbers per ward (~>2000), blue is moderate (~1000-2000), and red is low (~<1000). So you can easily see that the numbers are increasing/decreasing in waves. It started high, then drastically drops, then gradually builds up again until it gets high, then drops pretty significantly again, then begins building up once more. What I'm seeing is naturally and easily explained by the growth of the Church: as membership per ward increases significantly to a certain point they split the stakes/wards and create new ones to fill the need, subsequently number of members per ward drops dramatically, over time though as the Church continues to grow membership per ward begins to climb again and the cycle is repeated. I have seen this very thing happen in the wards and stakes I have been in - as membership gets really high the wards/stakes are split and new ones added, membership is then really low for a while but gradually grows until we are full again and the pattern repeats. Very common, very natural, and very normal.

[h_p]

I'm not sure how you're justifying your conclusions based upon those statistics. To me I'm not seeing a downwards trend; rather, I'm seeing cyclical changes.

Well, I'm really not much of a statistician, and your explanation makes more sense than what I was seeing. I was interpreting it as a possible recent change toward smaller wards, but like I said in that post, I was doubtful the ratio was even meaningful at all. Honestly, I'm not looking for any conspiracy in the church or anything. I actually prefer smaller wards and stakes (though they can also be too small).

[Lizzy60]

There is a plan in the US to create smaller wards with fewer units per stake. My stake president detailed this for us at ward conference and told us to be prepared for these changes, which then occurred last Sept. He said that he received this information in a meeting with area (Dallas-Ft Worth) stake presidents and the Area Authority. He told us that the plan is for all US areas where there is enough density in the church population to warrant the changes. My ward was medium-sized, as was the other ward in our building. There are now three smallish wards in pretty much the same boundary. The big change is that we are now in a newly-created stake. Three stakes were made from the boundaries that currently had two stakes, and most of the wards are smallish, with fewer units per stake.

I have read discussions online where members in the Mormon Corridor have said the same thing is happening there. They have been told that it is for the same reason we were told by our stake president -- to help in reactivation efforts because returning members will feel more needed as they are given callings, and also there will be more leadership opportunities for active members.

Emmalee, of this forum, said the same thing happened in her Midwest US stake. An additional stake was created by creating smaller wards, and putting fewer wards in each stake.

FWIW, I am NOT being negative about this program, or the church. I am simply recounting the details that were plainly spoken by my stake president last year, as he recounted the meeting with the area authority. He was very detailed, and there were no surprises (except that my son and his family, who live a 45-minute drive from me, are now in my stake.

[h_p]

Hope I didn't come across as implying anything negative about what you said, Lizzy. Someone here was saying the move to smaller wards/stakes might be an attempt to fluff our numbers. I have no evidence of it, but either way, it's a snoozer of an issue for me. I'm more concerned about how the church seems to be more like Alma 4:10 these days.

BTW, our stake split last summer, only 3 years after splitting previously. I never heard any reasoning behind it like your SP gave, so I had just assumed it was because the Austin area was growing so much.

[Lizzy60]

Hope I didn't come across as implying anything negative about what you said, Lizzy. Someone here was saying the move to smaller wards/stakes might be an attempt to fluff our numbers. I have no evidence of it, but either way, it's a snoozer of an issue for me. I'm more concerned about how the church seems to be more like Alma 4:10 these days.

BTW, our stake split last summer, only 3 years after splitting previously. I never heard any reasoning behind it like your SP gave, so I had just assumed it was because the Austin area was growing so much.

I didn't think you implied anything negative. And about Alma 4:10 --- I believe many LDS are going to be surprised at how prophetic the Book of Mormon is about our day, and not in a particularly good way. Look at the arguments over Mormon 8:38, and who the Holy Church of God refers to.

[Silver Pie]

Spoken like someone who really has no idea what it's like. If you're willing to take some advice here, I'd beg you not to tell these kinds of things to someone who truly is suffering from depression. Telling them they're just "feeling down" and should just "snap out of it" or "have more faith" only makes it worse. I know people mean well, but a person really can't understand it until they've been through it themselves.

Amen to this. Depression, real depression, is a hole that is almost impossible to pull out of - and it can be fatal (suicide).

[shadow]

What was this depression? In my mind, in most cases nothing. Yes, there is a rare chemical depression, but most cases of depression are self induced and are simply a matter of 'feeling down'.

Spoken like someone who really has no idea what it's like. If you're willing to take some advice here, I'd beg you not to tell these kinds of things to someone who truly is suffering from depression. Telling them they're just "feeling down" and should just "snap out of it" or "have more faith" only makes it worse. I know people mean well, but a person really can't understand it until they've been through it themselves.

I agree with justdan. "Most cases" - not all cases.
President Hinckley mentioned that while on his mission he was down and his dad told him to get to work. Good advice.

[h_p]

I can't blame ya'll for thinking that way, I guess. It's what I used to believe, until I got to know some people intimately who have been suffering from it for decades. I now believe that depression and other mental illnesses are THE biggest spiritual challenge a person can be given in this life. Nothing else even comes close. I really do hope you will be willing to set aside your beliefs about this some day, and open your minds to understanding.

I'm not talking about people having a "down" day. We all have that now and then. I'm talking about the chronic kinds that can literally cripple your life, cause you to doubt everything, and make it nearly impossible to feel God's love.

[Joel]

This blog has some discussion about the latest statistics: https://ldschurchgrowth.blogspot.com/

[Robin Hood]

This blog has some discussion about the latest statistics: https://ldschurchgrowth.blogspot.com/

That website clearly has some duff information.
It lists significant growth (in excess of 10%, over 3000 people) for Ireland.
There has been very little, if any, growth in Ireland.

[Darren]

Regarding the relationship of missionaries serving, missionary ages, and church growth it would help to understand traditional, lost tribes of Israel culture and teachings in this area. So here I go:

According to the available Scriptures of the lost tribes of Israel, the traditional role of what we call a missionary today is what would be the role of "The National Guard" - to go forth from the goodly society to both protect and provide opportunities for growth and expansion.

One of the ancient Church Headquarters of the "Band" of lost tribes of Israel was the ancient Hanseatic City of London.

When the young men took their oaths in one of the four Inns of the London Temple, they then were charged with the "National Guard" role.

Temple Bar served as a boundary marker for that society in London.


Temple Bar Memorial built in 1880 by Sir Horace Jones

Temple Bar - principal ceremonial entrance to the City of London - built in 1670 by Sir Christopher Wren

Since 450 A.D. the purpose and location of Temple Bar was traditionally a guarded entrance to the Hanseatic City of London

London Temple built by the Knights Templar in 1185 near the original temple site dating from about 450 A.D.

The Hansa - The Goodly Society based upon Ancestral Law, originally based in Odense upon the Danish Island of Fyn.

And as I have said many times before, this role of National Guard and the expansion of the goodly society was never the role or job of the sisters, and this obligation upon the young men was not intended to put an undue burden upon a young man not ready or able to serve.

From this historical perspective it would be well for the Church to put back up the ages for service of 19 for the men and 21 for the sisters. Instead of bending to the will of the world in gender issues.

Looks to me as if we have not been tending to our own boundaries, and barricade from the influences of the world.

God Bless,
Darren

[samizdat]

Ldschurchgrowthblogspot.com is not duff Robinhood. Ireland with 10 percent growth would be something like 350 baptisms in a year.

Might be refugees or simply statistical noise.

[Robin Hood]

Ldschurchgrowthblogspot.com is not duff Robinhood. Ireland with 10 percent growth would be something like 350 baptisms in a year.

Might be refugees or simply statistical noise.

There is absolutely no way there was 350 baptisms in Ireland last year.
Not even close.

[djinwa]

Fascinating how many say just follow the spirit or rely on your testimony of Christ or whatever. So we teach our kids for 18 years to be obedient, and that our leaders are inspired and will not lead us astray, but then when leaders are wrong or abusive, stand your ground? Which is it?

La di da, just follow your feelings, except don't! Mental illness will result. Some are better at blocking out nonsense than others, which is why they cope better.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the influence of the internet. The world in not the same as it was. There is much more information available with but a few clicks. For example, I did not know that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy until I was 38 years old in 1997, from the internet. Somehow they forgot to put that in all the lesson manuals I'd read all my life.

Do a google search on Mormonism and the second entry is Recovery from Mormonism. How does that work when investigators can read that, and elders, too? I could see more depression if you are fed that info daily by people you contact.

There are legitimate problems with doctrine and history the church will have to address. They have admitted some things in the essays, but they're going to have to go further.

Speaking of the essays, this statement is a problem:
"Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form."

https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng&old=true

[RAB]

Fascinating how many say just follow the spirit or rely on your testimony of Christ or whatever. So we teach our kids for 18 years to be obedient, and that our leaders are inspired and will not lead us astray, but then when leaders are wrong or abusive, stand your ground? Which is it?

La di da, just follow your feelings, except don't! Mental illness will result. Some are better at blocking out nonsense than others, which is why they cope better.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the influence of the internet. The world in not the same as it was. There is much more information available with but a few clicks. For example, I did not know that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy until I was 38 years old in 1997, from the internet. Somehow they forgot to put that in all the lesson manuals I'd read all my life.

Do a google search on Mormonism and the second entry is Recovery from Mormonism. How does that work when investigators can read that, and elders, too? I could see more depression if you are fed that info daily by people you contact.

There are legitimate problems with doctrine and history the church will have to address. They have admitted some things in the essays, but they're going to have to go further.

Speaking of the essays, this statement is a problem:
"Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form."

https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng&old=true

I don't really have a problem with the statement. God works with imperfect human beings that said some things that are, in fact, sometimes racist by today's standards, but were probably considered mainstream during their times. Even Joseph Smith struggled with the main moral issue of his day, what to do about slavery. If you read Church history, you see him fall in line with the other Christian denominations of the time and cite the Old Testament as justification of slavery since the Lord gives instructions on how to treat slaves. However, over time his position evolved until eventually he was against slavery, but sought a peaceful solution...have the federal government use the treasury to buy the slaves freedom. I must admit, than when I started dating my future wife, a Japanese American, I wondered if I had violated some divine principle, because I had read the statements you are referring to from leaders in earlier decades. However, read in context, it was clear to me that their statements, like Bruce R. McKonkie's about skin color in Mormon Doctrine, was not doctrine, since it fails the definition of doctrine (not found in the scriptures, nor routinely taught by the Bretheren). Instead, I took the statements about marriage as given in the context of reducing as many challenges to marriage as possible. For example, along with advice against interracial marriage, there was also advice not to marry outside of your own economic circumstance. I have seen how those raised with different standards of living can struggle early on in marriage (though I would advise them to understand that they are going to see how to spend money differently--not to avoid marriage). Likewise, marriage between different races can be complicated if they are also different cultures. My wife, though she is Japanese American, was raised essentially in the same culture I was, and the few things she did have from Japanese culture were neat to learn about. None of her siblings married Asians, and most of her cousins also married white people. One was even accused of being a banana by other Asians in high school--yellow on the outside, but white on the inside. The point is, the advice, in the time it was given, may have had more to do with trying to blend two cultures that were very different in a marriage than the color of ones skin or physical features. So, during the times the advice was given (IIRC, 50s-70s) interracial marriage probably did bring on some unwelcome stress to marriage, as did marrying outside of similar economic circumstances. But, by the time I was married in 2001, it was no big deal. I believe our society is much more open about learning form other cultures, marrying from different economic statuses, etc. than it has been in the past. So, while well-meaning leaders may have shared what they felt was sound advice to relieve pressures of marriage during their times, none of that was doctrine. All that statement is saying is that no racism is part of the Lord's plan, nor has it ever been. But God still works with imperfect people, for which I am grateful. If he can work with imperfect people in positions as prophets, apostles, 70s, etc. then he can also work with me. I think it is important to remember we were promised that the Church, as a whole, would never be led into apostasy...not that our leaders would be perfect or never make mistakes.

[francisco.colaco]

Here's a comparison of the number of new converts per new ward created each year (new converts / new wards) since 2001:
2001: 1927
2002: 5542.8
2003: 2805.4
2004: 671.1
2005: 683.6
2006: 793.1
2007: 924.4
2008: 1115.3
2009: 1004.3
2010: 1299.2
2011: 2499
2012: 1483.2
2013: 1253.4
2014: 788.9
2015: 662.9
2016: 861.9

The last 3 years seems to be trending toward smaller wards, if this ratio has any meaning at all, but I suspect this ratio has as much to do with distribution of new converts as it does a change in desired ward size.

The Church also grows through NATURAL growth. Something I was told we Mormons are very good at performing.

[Rensai]

Fascinating how many say just follow the spirit or rely on your testimony of Christ or whatever. So we teach our kids for 18 years to be obedient, and that our leaders are inspired and will not lead us astray, but then when leaders are wrong or abusive, stand your ground? Which is it?

La di da, just follow your feelings, except don't! Mental illness will result. Some are better at blocking out nonsense than others, which is why they cope better.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the influence of the internet. The world in not the same as it was. There is much more information available with but a few clicks. For example, I did not know that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy until I was 38 years old in 1997, from the internet. Somehow they forgot to put that in all the lesson manuals I'd read all my life.

Do a google search on Mormonism and the second entry is Recovery from Mormonism. How does that work when investigators can read that, and elders, too? I could see more depression if you are fed that info daily by people you contact.

There are legitimate problems with doctrine and history the church will have to address. They have admitted some things in the essays, but they're going to have to go further.

Speaking of the essays, this statement is a problem:
"Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form."

https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng&old=true

I don't really have a problem with the statement. God works with imperfect human beings that said some things that are, in fact, sometimes racist by today's standards, but were probably considered mainstream during their times. Even Joseph Smith struggled with the main moral issue of his day, what to do about slavery. If you read Church history, you see him fall in line with the other Christian denominations of the time and cite the Old Testament as justification of slavery since the Lord gives instructions on how to treat slaves. However, over time his position evolved until eventually he was against slavery, but sought a peaceful solution...have the federal government use the treasury to buy the slaves freedom. I must admit, than when I started dating my future wife, a Japanese American, I wondered if I had violated some divine principle, because I had read the statements you are referring to from leaders in earlier decades. However, read in context, it was clear to me that their statements, like Bruce R. McKonkie's about skin color in Mormon Doctrine, was not doctrine, since it fails the definition of doctrine (not found in the scriptures, nor routinely taught by the Bretheren). Instead, I took the statements about marriage as given in the context of reducing as many challenges to marriage as possible. For example, along with advice against interracial marriage, there was also advice not to marry outside of your own economic circumstance. I have seen how those raised with different standards of living can struggle early on in marriage (though I would advise them to understand that they are going to see how to spend money differently--not to avoid marriage). Likewise, marriage between different races can be complicated if they are also different cultures. My wife, though she is Japanese American, was raised essentially in the same culture I was, and the few things she did have from Japanese culture were neat to learn about. None of her siblings married Asians, and most of her cousins also married white people. One was even accused of being a banana by other Asians in high school--yellow on the outside, but white on the inside. The point is, the advice, in the time it was given, may have had more to do with trying to blend two cultures that were very different in a marriage than the color of ones skin or physical features. So, during the times the advice was given (IIRC, 50s-70s) interracial marriage probably did bring on some unwelcome stress to marriage, as did marrying outside of similar economic circumstances. But, by the time I was married in 2001, it was no big deal. I believe our society is much more open about learning form other cultures, marrying from different economic statuses, etc. than it has been in the past. So, while well-meaning leaders may have shared what they felt was sound advice to relieve pressures of marriage during their times, none of that was doctrine. All that statement is saying is that no racism is part of the Lord's plan, nor has it ever been. But God still works with imperfect people, for which I am grateful. If he can work with imperfect people in positions as prophets, apostles, 70s, etc. then he can also work with me. I think it is important to remember we were promised that the Church, as a whole, would never be led into apostasy...not that our leaders would be perfect or never make mistakes.

I think you're overlooking the two biggest issues with that statement. First, skin color is mentioned as a curse in the BoM and PoGP. Disavowing "theories that skin color is a curse" is a direct rejection of scriptures that state exactly that. I'll list some below. The second big problem is that up til about the 1970's or 1980's basically every church leader made racist statements, so were they all leading us astray? Those are both big problems.

2 Nephi 5:21

"And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a SKIN OF BLACKNESS to come upon them."


Jacob 3:5

"Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the CURSING WHICH HATH COME UPON THEIR SKINS, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them."


Jacob 3:8

"O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their SKINS WILL BE WHITER than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God."

Jacob 3:9

"Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the DARKNESS OF THEIR SKINS; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers."


Alma 3:6

"And the SKINS OF THE LAMANITES WERE DARK, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men."


3 Nephi 2:15

"And their curse was taken from them, and their SKIN BECAME WHITE like unto the Nephites;"

". . . there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people . . . (Moses 7:8)."

"And . . . they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them (Moses 7:22)."

". . . from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land (Abraham 1:24)."

"Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, . . . Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, . . . but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

"Now, Pharaoh being of the lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, . . . (Abraham 1:26-27)."

[RAB]

Fascinating how many say just follow the spirit or rely on your testimony of Christ or whatever. So we teach our kids for 18 years to be obedient, and that our leaders are inspired and will not lead us astray, but then when leaders are wrong or abusive, stand your ground? Which is it?

La di da, just follow your feelings, except don't! Mental illness will result. Some are better at blocking out nonsense than others, which is why they cope better.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the influence of the internet. The world in not the same as it was. There is much more information available with but a few clicks. For example, I did not know that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy until I was 38 years old in 1997, from the internet. Somehow they forgot to put that in all the lesson manuals I'd read all my life.

Do a google search on Mormonism and the second entry is Recovery from Mormonism. How does that work when investigators can read that, and elders, too? I could see more depression if you are fed that info daily by people you contact.

There are legitimate problems with doctrine and history the church will have to address. They have admitted some things in the essays, but they're going to have to go further.

Speaking of the essays, this statement is a problem:
"Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form."

https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng&old=true

I don't really have a problem with the statement. God works with imperfect human beings that said some things that are, in fact, sometimes racist by today's standards, but were probably considered mainstream during their times. Even Joseph Smith struggled with the main moral issue of his day, what to do about slavery. If you read Church history, you see him fall in line with the other Christian denominations of the time and cite the Old Testament as justification of slavery since the Lord gives instructions on how to treat slaves. However, over time his position evolved until eventually he was against slavery, but sought a peaceful solution...have the federal government use the treasury to buy the slaves freedom. I must admit, than when I started dating my future wife, a Japanese American, I wondered if I had violated some divine principle, because I had read the statements you are referring to from leaders in earlier decades. However, read in context, it was clear to me that their statements, like Bruce R. McKonkie's about skin color in Mormon Doctrine, was not doctrine, since it fails the definition of doctrine (not found in the scriptures, nor routinely taught by the Bretheren). Instead, I took the statements about marriage as given in the context of reducing as many challenges to marriage as possible. For example, along with advice against interracial marriage, there was also advice not to marry outside of your own economic circumstance. I have seen how those raised with different standards of living can struggle early on in marriage (though I would advise them to understand that they are going to see how to spend money differently--not to avoid marriage). Likewise, marriage between different races can be complicated if they are also different cultures. My wife, though she is Japanese American, was raised essentially in the same culture I was, and the few things she did have from Japanese culture were neat to learn about. None of her siblings married Asians, and most of her cousins also married white people. One was even accused of being a banana by other Asians in high school--yellow on the outside, but white on the inside. The point is, the advice, in the time it was given, may have had more to do with trying to blend two cultures that were very different in a marriage than the color of ones skin or physical features. So, during the times the advice was given (IIRC, 50s-70s) interracial marriage probably did bring on some unwelcome stress to marriage, as did marrying outside of similar economic circumstances. But, by the time I was married in 2001, it was no big deal. I believe our society is much more open about learning form other cultures, marrying from different economic statuses, etc. than it has been in the past. So, while well-meaning leaders may have shared what they felt was sound advice to relieve pressures of marriage during their times, none of that was doctrine. All that statement is saying is that no racism is part of the Lord's plan, nor has it ever been. But God still works with imperfect people, for which I am grateful. If he can work with imperfect people in positions as prophets, apostles, 70s, etc. then he can also work with me. I think it is important to remember we were promised that the Church, as a whole, would never be led into apostasy...not that our leaders would be perfect or never make mistakes.

I think you're overlooking the two biggest issues with that statement. First, skin color is mentioned as a curse in the BoM and PoGP. Disavowing "theories that skin color is a curse" is a direct rejection of scriptures that state exactly that. I'll list some below. The second big problem is that up til about the 1970's or 1980's basically every church leader made racist statements, so were they all leading us astray? Those are both big problems.

2 Nephi 5:21

"And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a SKIN OF BLACKNESS to come upon them."


Jacob 3:5

"Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the CURSING WHICH HATH COME UPON THEIR SKINS, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them."


Jacob 3:8

"O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their SKINS WILL BE WHITER than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God."

Jacob 3:9

"Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the DARKNESS OF THEIR SKINS; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers."


Alma 3:6

"And the SKINS OF THE LAMANITES WERE DARK, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men."


3 Nephi 2:15

"And their curse was taken from them, and their SKIN BECAME WHITE like unto the Nephites;"

". . . there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people . . . (Moses 7:8)."

"And . . . they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them (Moses 7:22)."

". . . from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land (Abraham 1:24)."

"Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, . . . Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, . . . but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

"Now, Pharaoh being of the lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, . . . (Abraham 1:26-27)."

Very well aware of those scriptures. See https://www.fairmormon.org/archive/publ ... -blackness for an explanation that speaks more of the prophets classifying insiders vs. outsiders, rather than an actual change of skin pigmentation as a response. The same explanation applies to the Pearl of Great Price references. So, no, I don't have a problem with the statement as it relates to skin color claims, since that is how the modern reader interprets those scriptures, not necessarily a factual description of skin changing color when written.

Second, I have no problem with the leaders from the 70s making those statements. Remember, after the revelation allowing the Priesthood to all worthy bretheren, Bruce R. McConkie admitted he had made a mistake, and that we had received new revelation on the matter. So, no, some of the leaders (it was not virtually all of them--many pushed much earlier for inclusion of all races in the Priesthood) being incorrect about cursed skin does not bother me because they did not lead the Church into apostasy. Our leaders opinion's about issues that do not pertain to the salvation of mankind could hardly be characterized as leading the Church into apostasy. While I suppose there could be an argument that it did affect the salvation of Blacks prior to 1978, I would argue that it did not, as surely God would not withhold salvation from good brothers and sisters who, through no fault of their own, could not yet receive the ordinances they required...Just like God will not withhold salvation from those people who were refused the gospel by Peter prior to his revelation that the Church should go out to all people in the early days of the Christian church.