Insight From Statistical Report

[moinmoin]

I think they've been very worried for the last 20 years. The missionary age change, all the talks on marriage and the responsibility to bring children into the world etc. They've seen this trend in starker clarity and can see how it ends. If the deaths and resignations and lapsed memberships aren't being replaced by births (and they aren't) then that is an ever decreasing circle. At 65,000 for 2020 - that's 1 new child for every 250 members per annum, and shrinking.
[/quote]

I think that talks on large families (directed at young adults to encourage them to have large families) have sharply declined over the years. There is a similar paucity of talks about mothers working. The Church's tack has been quite different over the last several years, compared to what it used to be. It largely seeks to avoid making people feel like they aren't measuring up or need to get with the program. Instead, talks generally center around "you're good enough, keep your chin up," etc.

[Analytics]

So, when I was missionary age in the late 1970s, South America was the hot place to go for baptisms. So we saw the tons of people get baptized, with the obvious effect on membership growth, but what we didn't see was the very low rate of retention. So, the membership rolls have a huge bubble of inactive folks who may stay on the rolls until at least 2050. That's a huge deferred loss that will eventually will come due. That's why I asked earlier if anyone knows when the 110 year policy for lost souls was implemented.

I don't know when that was implemented, but I have a pretty good guess.

The Church had an amazing growth year in 1989. They had 393,940 baptisms (318,940 convert baptisms, and 75,000 children of record baptized). With nearly 400,000 baptisms, how much would you guess the total membership increased by? If you guessed 580,000, you would be right: with less than 400,000 new members, the total number of members increased by 580,000, from 6.72 million to 7.3 million.

How did they pull that off? My best guess is that they took about 250,000 members that they had presumed dead and decided to retroactively presume they were still alive after all.

[Lem]

So, when I was missionary age in the late 1970s, South America was the hot place to go for baptisms. So we saw the tons of people get baptized, with the obvious effect on membership growth, but what we didn't see was the very low rate of retention. So, the membership rolls have a huge bubble of inactive folks who may stay on the rolls until at least 2050. That's a huge deferred loss that will eventually will come due. That's why I asked earlier if anyone knows when the 110 year policy for lost souls was implemented.

I don't know when that was implemented, but I have a pretty good guess.

The Church had an amazing growth year in 1989. They had 393,940 baptisms (318,940 convert baptisms, and 75,000 children of record baptized). With nearly 400,000 baptisms, how much would you guess the total membership increased by? If you guessed 580,000, you would be right: with less than 400,000 new members, the total number of members increased by 580,000, from 6.72 million to 7.3 million.

How did they pull that off? My best guess is that they took about 250,000 members that they had presumed dead and decided to retroactively presume they were still alive after all.

Interesting, I do vaguely recall hearing about a move from age 110 to 120 for presuming death, let me see if I can find a year. Although, possibly, was that the year they switched from children of record 'baptized' to children of record 'born' ? If I recall correctly, that resulted in an odd bump also, by adding in 6 or 7 years of kids.

[Analytics]

Interesting, I do vaguely recall hearing about a move from age 110 to 120 for presuming death, let me see if I can find a year. Although, possibly, was that the year they switched from children of record 'baptized' to children of record 'born' ? If I recall correctly, that resulted in an odd bump also, by adding in 6 or 7 years of kids.

Hmmm. In 1989 they reported children as "Children of record baptized." They still could have redefined "members" to include all children of record; just because they didn't report the count of new children of record that year doesn't mean they don't count new children of record in the totals.

[Res Ipsa]

Interesting, I do vaguely recall hearing about a move from age 110 to 120 for presuming death, let me see if I can find a year. Although, possibly, was that the year they switched from children of record 'baptized' to children of record 'born' ? If I recall correctly, that resulted in an odd bump also, by adding in 6 or 7 years of kids.

Hmmm. In 1989 they reported children as "Children of record baptized." They still could have redefined "members" to include all children of record; just because they didn't report the count of new children of record that year doesn't mean they don't count new children of record in the totals.

If you scroll down the link in the OP, the author works hard to sift through the changes and create a meaningful graph of new children. I think he concluded that one year they even used the wrong label.

[IHAQ]

I think that talks on large families (directed at young adults to encourage them to have large families) have sharply declined over the years. There is a similar paucity of talks about mothers working. The Church's tack has been quite different over the last several years, compared to what it used to be. It largely seeks to avoid making people feel like they aren't measuring up or need to get with the program. Instead, talks generally center around "you're good enough, keep your chin up," etc.

The new devotionals that are aimed at young single adults and young married adults are geared towards talking about eternal marriage and families. It may be less blunt but it's still there. The Church is still very much trying to get young single adults focussed on getting married and having kids.

April 2021 - Stevenson talking to BYU graduates

The worldwide pandemic and its effect on the economy as well as the current political climate may have, for some, elevated the fears of entering into marriage or starting a family.
“Satan understands that the family is central to the Lord’s plan of happiness. His strategy is to cast shadows of skepticism in your life. He is striving to sow the dark seeds of fear in your heart, anything to keep you from experiencing the most glorious, rewarding part of mortality: the bright holiness and happiness that comes from finding an eternal partner, and bringing Heavenly Father’s children into this world,” Elder Stevenson assured graduates.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.or ... your-fears
They've just graduated and he's telling them to get married and start having kids.

April 2021 - Cook talking to Ensign College graduates

In Church doctrine, the family is central to our Father in Heaven’s plan for the eternal destiny of his children, Elder Cook said.
According to an article in The New York Times, many in the world are choosing not to get married or are delaying marriage, Elder Cook noted. From 1920 through 1970, the percentage of married households in the United States was between 65% and 72%. Between 1980 and 2010, it dropped from 62% to 51%. As of 2020, the percentage has remained close to 50%.
Although less precipitous, the drop is also reflected among Church members. “The family is an eternal institution ordained of God from before the foundation of the world,” he said. “I pray that most of you will marry and be blessed with the opportunity of having children. There is no greater blessing in this life than having children.”

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.or ... -graduates
They've just graduated and he's telling them not to delay getting married and having kids.

Oct 2017 - Oaks, General Conference

The proclamation affirms the continuing duty of husband and wife to multiply and replenish the earth and their “solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children”:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng

Oct 2019 - Oaks, General Conference

Fifth, we also have a distinctive perspective on children. We look on the bearing and nurturing of children as part of God’s plan and a joyful and sacred duty of those given the power to participate in it.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng

[Lem]

I don't know when that was implemented, but I have a pretty good guess.

The Church had an amazing growth year in 1989. They had 393,940 baptisms (318,940 convert baptisms, and 75,000 children of record baptized). With nearly 400,000 baptisms, how much would you guess the total membership increased by? If you guessed 580,000, you would be right: with less than 400,000 new members, the total number of members increased by 580,000, from 6.72 million to 7.3 million.

How did they pull that off? My best guess is that they took about 250,000 members that they had presumed dead and decided to retroactively presume they were still alive after all.

Interesting, I do vaguely recall hearing about a move from age 110 to 120 for presuming death, let me see if I can find a year. Although, possibly, was that the year they switched from children of record 'baptized' to children of record 'born' ? If I recall correctly, that resulted in an odd bump also, by adding in 6 or 7 years of kids.

Coincidently, the bump in the year 1989 and this piece of information about the accounting for children of record was referenced in something else I was looking at today:

This book, as well as other investigations, such as this and this, indicate that sometime, probably in the 1980's, the LDS church switched from counting 8-year-olds baptized as members to counting all children of record, including those under the age of 8, as members. The effect of such a switch would be a sudden otherwise-inexplicable increase in total membership as all existing children of record under the age of 8 were added at once.

A sudden increase of this sort, in fact, is observed in the years 1989 and 1990, where approximately 250,000 individuals were inexplicably added to the membership totals. As it turns out, this figure is very close to the estimated number of active children of record generated in the preceding 8 years. Therefore, it is assumed that prior to 1989, children of record baptisms are to be used in the number balance, and from 1989 to the present children of record are to be used, with the estimated number of children of record from the preceding eight years added for the years 1989 and 1990.

https://www.fullerconsideration.com/mem ... horeach110

[Res Ipsa]

Nice catch, Lem.

[kairos]

I think when the sudden surge in member ship occurred in 1989, and the church was embarrassed , that the church was forced to switch it’s accounting and law firm from from Dewey, Cheathum , and Howe to Kirton and McConkie.
I know that there was much back room discussion concerning the switch and quite a battle over the two firms battling for Dewey’s work. In the end Kirton and McConkie won out over its competitor Sue, Grabbit and Run because KM played the nepotism card.
Dewey, Cheathum and Howe continued to be a major player in defending Ponzi scheme defendants in the I-15 corridor. You may check the credentials of DCH by viewing any number of Marx brothers and Three Stooge films.


Just laying out the truth one lie at a time!

k

[Analytics]

Coincidently, the bump in the year 1989 and this piece of information about the accounting for children of record was referenced in something else I was looking at today:

This book, as well as other investigations, such as this and this, indicate that sometime, probably in the 1980's, the LDS church switched from counting 8-year-olds baptized as members to counting all children of record, including those under the age of 8, as members. The effect of such a switch would be a sudden otherwise-inexplicable increase in total membership as all existing children of record under the age of 8 were added at once.

A sudden increase of this sort, in fact, is observed in the years 1989 and 1990...

[emphases added]
Great reference--that in all likelihood is part of it.

I note that there were actually two years that had negative decrements. 1989 had a negative decrement of 193,294, and then 1990 had a negative decrement of 43,886. This makes me think at least two different changes in the counting system were changed.

A few notes:

Generally, the people who receive reports don't like changes in the accounting rules, because they obscure rather than illuminate what is actually happening. When there are such changes, the changes, the reason for the changes, and the impact are explained in detail. No explanation for these changes were given by the Church, of course.

Since the negative decrements happened twice, there were at least two changes in the rules for who is counted as a member. There could have been more changes.

These changes happened when Gordon B. Hinckley was taking over control of the Church. Was he deliberately trying to pad the numbers because it was good publicity? If he wanted to change the rules to inflate the number of members immediately and into the future by being as liberal as possible as to who counts as a member, he might make the following changes:

• Count children as members upon birth.
• Don't remove unbaptized members from the count until 18.
• Don't remove people who aren't confirmed dead until 110.