Steve Benson's thread on RfM

[_BartBurk]

Is the premise correct? Is activity really plummeting? And is it just a matter of recent converts not staying active or is it happening to a greater extent among multiple generation Mormons? The activity in the local ward seems to be at least the same percentage as it was when I arrived here in South Bend 22 years ago. When I visit Utah County, it doesn't seem like the active Mormons are a lower percentage than they were when I lived there 22 years ago.

There is no denying that home teaching percentages have dropped in my area, but that doesn't seem to have caused more inactive members than the historical average.

[_Fence Sitter]

Bring back polyandry.

"Take my wife....


Please"

[_Yoda]

Is the premise correct? Is activity really plummeting? And is it just a matter of recent converts not staying active or is it happening to a greater extent among multiple generation Mormons? The activity in the local ward seems to be at least the same percentage as it was when I arrived here in South Bend 22 years ago. When I visit Utah County, it doesn't seem like the active Mormons are a lower percentage than they were when I lived there 22 years ago.

There is no denying that home teaching percentages have dropped in my area, but that doesn't seem to have caused more inactive members than the historical average.

I think it is more a case of enough people are going inactive that the Church leaders are taking notice. Here is the article where a lot of this perception of inactivity is stemming from:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53408 ... h.html.csp

Although Jensen states that inactivity is nowhere near "Titanic proportions", there is still a recognized problem based on the Internet, and hard questions involving Church history.

My goal with this thread is really not to get into some argument involving whether or not inactivity is a problem. In my mind, any
inactivity should be an issue because there is normally a reason why.

What I really wanted to accomplish with this thread was batting around some ideas where improvements could occur.

[_Yoda]

Numbers in a smaller ward mean there is more callings to fill so leadership has to work harder (like they are not already over taxed) to fill all the required callings. It gives you positions to use as an incentive to reactivate or increase the activation of people. I think they have figured out that people with callings are more likely to stay active.

OK...I think I misread what BC was saying. BC was suggesting that larger wards be established so that there weren't as many demands on the youth.

I understand why his GA friend may have balked at that.

But I still don't understand why the shortening of the meeting time would be balked at. The shortening of the meeting time would have nothing to do with callings. As a matter of fact, it would make it easier for people to actually fill those callings. It might even encourage people to be more involved. They wouldn't be so taxed on a Sunday with three hours of Church. It gives more time to prepare...more time for choir practice, etc.

[_bcspace]

They should get rid of both visiting teaching and home teaching and have couples visit/home teach.

The visiting should be targeted to the inactive imho.

Numbers in a smaller ward mean there is more callings to fill so leadership has to work harder (like they are not already over taxed) to fill all the required callings. It gives you positions to use as an incentive to reactivate or increase the activation of people. I think they have figured out that people with callings are more likely to stay active.

The problem with larger wards is that you have too many people just hanging around. Some feel unwanted because they don't have a calling. Others are just fine with that but end up getting lost in the woodwork.

On the other hand, a small ward is stressful on the youth programs. Often a ward has one to three youth attending in each class. We can't do anything about that for YM/YW except to try and activate and hope for large families. For Sunday School, I have authorized consolidation of classes in my own jurisdiction and it works much better. There are only two differing manuals for youth Sunday School, therefore, you can go to two classes, say one for 12-14 year olds and one for 15-17. To keep Sunday School presidencies busy, we go with one counselor, not two, and they are tasked to substitute when needed in youth, GD, or GE.

If they gave women the priesthood they could get rid of Relief Society--- kill two birds with one stone. :)

Should not and will not happen.

Is the premise correct? Is activity really plummeting?

Not at all. Growth has slowed as it has for most other Churches. NOM's and the DAMU is a tiny percentage of the "swamp". A NOM's only perception is NOMish because usually a NOM has no experience in visiting (doing HT) and knowing what's really out there. Activity rate has always been around 50%. TR rate has always been around 33%. Couple that with constant positive growth and it's impossible to have what the apostates around here are crowing about.

There is no denying that home teaching percentages have dropped in my area, but that doesn't seem to have caused more inactive members than the historical average.

I have a real personal dislike for HT. At the same time, I realize it is for good purpose and I have had good experiences with it. I am for getting rid if it as we know it, but there still should be a great deal of visiting.

[_Chap]

...

Is the premise correct? Is activity really plummeting?

Not at all. Growth has slowed as it has for most other Churches. NOM's and the DAMU is a tiny percentage of the "swamp". A NOM's only perception is NOMish because usually a NOM has no experience in visiting (doing HT) and knowing what's really out there. Activity rate has always been around 50%. TR rate has always been around 33%. Couple that with constant positive growth and it's impossible to have what the apostates around here are crowing about....

As the Pew survey (frequently cited on this board) showed, the approximately 1.7% of the US population who respond "LDS/Mormon" when asked to state their religion has remained constant for the last decade.

So despite its unusually large family sizes, and the constant missionary effort, the CoJCoLDS is just keeping pace with US population growth and no more.

That must mean there is a considerable outflow from the church to offset the effect of large families and missionary conversions, which without significant membership losses would act to increase the LDS share of the population.

[_BartBurk]

I think it is more a case of enough people are going inactive that the Church leaders are taking notice. Here is the article where a lot of this perception of inactivity is stemming from:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53408 ... h.html.csp

Although Jensen states that inactivity is nowhere near "Titanic proportions", there is still a recognized problem based on the Internet, and hard questions involving Church history.

My goal with this thread is really not to get into some argument involving whether or not inactivity is a problem. In my mind, any
inactivity should be an issue because there is normally a reason why.

What I really wanted to accomplish with this thread was batting around some ideas where improvements could occur.

There have always been people going inactive and there are always people being reactivated. I agree the church is not as much fun as it was when I joined the church in 1972. They have gone overboard in getting rid of the fun stuff. It may be that younger people are not going to have the emotional attachment older Mormons have to the church because the fun stuff and the memories have been taken away. I don't know if it is just about money. I find that most Mormons I talk to don't really want to go to a two hour block either.

[_Aristotle Smith]

As the Pew survey (frequently cited on this board) showed, the approximately 1.7% of the US population who respond "LDS/Mormon" when asked to state their religion has remained constant for the last decade.

So despite its unusually large family sizes, and the constant missionary effort, the CoJCoLDS is just keeping pace with US population growth and no more.

That must mean there is a considerable outflow from the church to offset the effect of large families and missionary conversions, which without significant membership losses would act to increase the LDS share of the population.

To preempt bcspace, that's not official doctrine.

[_bcspace]

That must mean there is a considerable outflow from the church to offset the effect of large families and missionary conversions, which without significant membership losses would act to increase the LDS share of the population.

Just not seeing it in the US membership. Any "outflow" there is does not come from among the actives.

[_Simon Southerton]

Just not seeing it in the US membership. Any "outflow" there is does not come from among the actives.

Elder Marlin Jensen is seeing it. Apostates tend to come from among the actives.

Did the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints know that members are "leaving in droves?" a woman asked.

"We are aware," said Elder Marlin Jensen, “and I'm speaking of the 15 men that are above me in the hierarchy of the church. They really do know and they really care, And they realize that maybe since Kirtland, we never have had a period of, I’ll call it apostasy, like we’re having right now; largely over these issues.”