2025 Lowest number of self identifying USA LDS adults for 20 years

[MG 2.0]

Zoom in on unit tracker 2025 summary. They are the same.

Ah, OK. Thanks. After doing some more Google searching it appears that much of the change is due to maturity factors. Aging established core areas and neighborhoods in Kearns, West Jordan, and Midvale.

YSA wards are going through massive reorganization and consolidation. Many YSA's are going back to their home wards.

Active members are moving from older, established areas (where costs are high) to suburban areas (where the church is building new units). We've noticed this as one of our married kids and her husband and two children moved from an older area in Layton out to a new build area in Syracuse.

As reported by the Cumorah Foundation, the trend is often described as a "shrivel" in urban cores while growing elsewhere, but it overall indicates a contraction in traditional, established Mormon areas in Utah.

I know in our neighborhoods we've had a new Stake formed as a result of growth in the Utah County area represented by the green dots on your map south of Point of the Mountain (division between SL and Utah County).

I think the whole premise and underlying assumptions of the OP might be slightly overblown and essentially not telling the full story in regards to the overall growth of the church throughout the world. The story there is expansion not contraction.

Different areas deal with different population dynamics. I would expect that isn't anything too out of the ordinary.

The church is alive and well and fulfilling its mission. There will be many, however, that drop out of the race.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

After doing some more Google searching it appears that much of the change is due to maturity factors. Aging established core areas and neighborhoods in Kearns, West Jordan, and Midvale.

YSA wards are going through massive reorganization and consolidation. Many YSA's are going back to their home wards.

Active members are moving from older, established areas (where costs are high) to suburban areas (where the church is building new units). We've noticed this as one of our married kids and her husband and two children moved from an older area in Layton out to a new build area in Syracuse.

As reported by the Cumorah Foundation, the trend is often described as a "shrivel" in urban cores while growing elsewhere, but it overall indicates a contraction in traditional, established Mormon areas in Utah.

I know in our neighborhoods we've had a new Stake formed as a result of growth in the Utah County area represented by the green dots on your map south of Point of the Mountain (division between SL and Utah County).

I think the whole premise and underlying assumptions of the OP might be slightly overblown and essentially not telling the full story in regards to the overall growth of the church throughout the world. The story there is expansion not contraction.

Different areas deal with different population dynamics. I would expect that isn't anything too out of the ordinary.

The church is alive and well and fulfilling its mission. There will be many, however, that drop out of the race.

Regards,
MG

Please support all these assertions with data, links, references, sources etc. like you requested others do. You’re not a hypocrite, right? I’m particularly to see the reference on the Cumorah Foundation that you’ve quoted as saying “shrivel”. Or have you been copy pasting AI yet again?

Thanks in anticipation
IHQ

[Rivendale]

After doing some more Google searching it appears that much of the change is due to maturity factors. Aging established core areas and neighborhoods in Kearns, West Jordan, and Midvale.

YSA wards are going through massive reorganization and consolidation. Many YSA's are going back to their home wards.

Active members are moving from older, established areas (where costs are high) to suburban areas (where the church is building new units). We've noticed this as one of our married kids and her husband and two children moved from an older area in Layton out to a new build area in Syracuse.

As reported by the Cumorah Foundation, the trend is often described as a "shrivel" in urban cores while growing elsewhere, but it overall indicates a contraction in traditional, established Mormon areas in Utah.

I know in our neighborhoods we've had a new Stake formed as a result of growth in the Utah County area represented by the green dots on your map south of Point of the Mountain (division between SL and Utah County).

I think the whole premise and underlying assumptions of the OP might be slightly overblown and essentially not telling the full story in regards to the overall growth of the church throughout the world. The story there is expansion not contraction.

Different areas deal with different population dynamics. I would expect that isn't anything too out of the ordinary.

The church is alive and well and fulfilling its mission. There will be many, however, that drop out of the race.

Regards,
MG

Please support all these assertions with data, links, references, sources etc. like you requested others do. You’re not a hypocrite, right? I’m particularly to see the reference on the Cumorah Foundation that you’ve quoted as saying “shrivel”. Or have you been copy pasting AI yet again?

Thanks in anticipation
IHQ

I was wondering how anyone could know about aging populations. So I googled it. Look familiar?

change in lds stakes salt lake area

+5
Multiple LDS stakes in the Salt Lake Valley have been dissolved, closed, or consolidated in late 2024 and early 2025, particularly in the southern Salt Lake Valley and Winder areas, reflecting significant membership and activity rate declines. Several wards have been absorbed into other, existing stakes. This contraction is due to demographic shifts and aging membership.

People always age!

[Equality]

Zoom in on unit tracker 2025 summary. They are the same.

I think the whole premise and underlying assumptions of the OP might be slightly overblown and essentially not telling the full story in regards to the overall growth of the church throughout the world. The story there is expansion not contraction.

Regards,
MG

You know who is not telling the "full story"? Your secretive, culty church whose leaders are not being honest in all their dealings with their fellow man, but are instead putting out propagandistic press releases touting the cherry-picked numbers that they believe put the best spin on the church's abysmal growth record.

If the church is going to put its topline membership number, it ought to provide the "full story" by giving out the following:

1. Weekly Sacrament meeting attendance
2. Number of current temple-recommend holders
3. Number of people who have made a full or partial tithe in the last year

These would provide much more context. The folks who say total number of members is less relevant than these other categories are correct.

To illustrate, consider the relative strength and vitality of two different hypothetical organizations, each claiming a membership of, say, 18 million people.

Organization A has 16 million people attending weekly events, making financial contributions, and volunteering their time to serve in the organization.

Organization B has 1 million people attending weekly events, making financial contributions, and volunteering their time to serve in the organization.

In providing an answer to the question "which of these two organizations has greater strength and vitality?" it would be imprudent to look only at the fact that both organizations have total membership of 18 million people, for one would have to conclude (without additional information) that they were of equal strength and vitality.

Of course, the public relations hacks of Organization B, who are handsomely paid to paint Organization B in the best possible light, would not want anyone to know that only 1 million out of their 18 million people were actually engaged meaningfully with the organization, would they?

To illustrate further with a real-world example: in 2006, I started my own religion following my own "Road to Damascus/First Vision" type experience. My epiphany was that we are all one, and that everyone belongs to the the one and only true and living church on the face of the earth, with which I am well pleased; yea, even The Church of Equality. Membership in The Church of Equality is open to all who would receive it--they don't even have to be of good cheer or pure in heart. My church is for everyone. Literally! The only requirement for membership is being born a human being on planet Earth. That's it.

At the founding of The Church of Equality in 2006, we had just 6.6 billion members. This made us the largest religion on Earth. We are now up to 8.3 billion and--miraculously!--are growing at the exact same rate as the growth of the planet's population.

Of course, The Church of Equality respects every individual's religious liberty, and if anyone apostasizes from Equalitarianism, unlike some cults that shall remain nameless, we will immediately remove their name from our membership rolls. All one need do to renounce their membership in The Church of Equality is send a notarized letter requesting name-removal, along with a small processing fee of $99, to The Church's headquarters.

I am happy to report that in 20 years since the founding of The Church (reminder: we ask all media to use the full name of The Church; i.e., The Church of Equality" when referring to The Church for the first time in any communication, and to please use the shorthand phrase "The Church" (with a capitalized "The") when referring to The Church again in the same piece, if necessary for space considerations*), not a single person has ever undertaken the name-removal process!

Inquiring minds who do not respect the sacred nature of the work performed by volunteer Members of The Church of Equality occasionally ask for more information abou the membership activity of Members of The Church of Equality. Given the most sensitive and sacred--not secret!--nature of that work, we do not divulge such information to people who are not prepared to receive it.

But the membership numbers speak for themselves: The Church of Equality is the world's largest and fastest-growing religion.

*We also ask the media to refrain from employing the term "Equalites" to refer to members of The Church, as it is a derogatory nickname invented by enemies of The Church and is considered a hateful slur by the 8+billion members of The Church worldwide. The correct way to refer to a member of The Church is "Member of The Church of Equality," unless referring to Members of The Church who are also members of the Equalitarian Amphitheatre Choir who can properly be referred to as "Equalitarians" but only when discussing their participation in the Equalitarian Amphitheatre Choir, as that world-renowned choir was named at a time when leaders of The Church, following the advice of consultants who had conducted numerous very expensive focus groups, plastered the name "Equalitarian" on every damn thing we did, only to later be told by a different group of high-priced consultants that *their* focus groups thought the name referred to a group of people who sing while riding horseback. So, we dropped it. But because of its historical relevance, we are willing to give some leeway to the media in using the term to describe our globally recognized singers.

[Equality]

Zoom in on unit tracker 2025 summary. They are the same.

The church is alive and well and fulfilling its mission. There will be many, however, that drop out of the race.

Regards,
MG

I thought it was stone cut out of the mountain without hands and rolling forth to fill the whole earth?

That prophecy definitely seems to apply with much greater force to The Church of Equality, with its current membership of 8.3 billion people (and growing by more than a million people each week), does it not?

[I Have Questions]

It’s like the Chairman of the board giving an annual report to shareholders and only declaring the company assets, keeping the amount of outstanding liabilities a secret. It’s called misleading the market. It’s lying. This is the Church’s own definition of Honesty

Lying is intentionally deceiving others. Bearing false witness is one form of lying. The Lord gave this commandment to the children of Israel: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” (Exodus 20:16). Jesus also taught this when He was on earth (see Matthew 19:18). There are many other forms of lying. When we speak untruths, we are guilty of lying. We can also intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.

The Church fails to live up to its own standard. Church leaders do not practice what they preach. I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised. If they’re prepared to operate a complex shell company scheme in order to lie to the SEC about wealth for a decade or more, then lying to the gullible members about membership numbers is child’s play.

[MG 2.0]

I think the whole premise and underlying assumptions of the OP might be slightly overblown and essentially not telling the full story in regards to the overall growth of the church throughout the world. The story there is expansion not contraction.

Regards,
MG

You know who is not telling the "full story"? Your secretive, culty church whose leaders are not being honest in all their dealings with their fellow man, but are instead putting out propagandistic press releases touting the cherry-picked numbers that they believe put the best spin on the church's abysmal growth record.

If the church is going to put its topline membership number, it ought to provide the "full story" by giving out the following:

1. Weekly Sacrament meeting attendance
2. Number of current temple-recommend holders
3. Number of people who have made a full or partial tithe in the last year

These would provide much more context. The folks who say total number of members is less relevant than these other categories are correct.

To illustrate, consider the relative strength and vitality of two different hypothetical organizations, each claiming a membership of, say, 18 million people.

Organization A has 16 million people attending weekly events, making financial contributions, and volunteering their time to serve in the organization.

Organization B has 1 million people attending weekly events, making financial contributions, and volunteering their time to serve in the organization.

In providing an answer to the question "which of these two organizations has greater strength and vitality?" it would be imprudent to look only at the fact that both organizations have total membership of 18 million people, for one would have to conclude (without additional information) that they were of equal strength and vitality.

Of course, the public relations hacks of Organization B, who are handsomely paid to paint Organization B in the best possible light, would not want anyone to know that only 1 million out of their 18 million people were actually engaged meaningfully with the organization, would they?

To illustrate further with a real-world example: in 2006, I started my own religion following my own "Road to Damascus/First Vision" type experience. My epiphany was that we are all one, and that everyone belongs to the the one and only true and living church on the face of the earth, with which I am well pleased; yea, even The Church of Equality. Membership in The Church of Equality is open to all who would receive it--they don't even have to be of good cheer or pure in heart. My church is for everyone. Literally! The only requirement for membership is being born a human being on planet Earth. That's it.

At the founding of The Church of Equality in 2006, we had just 6.6 billion members. This made us the largest religion on Earth. We are now up to 8.3 billion and--miraculously!--are growing at the exact same rate as the growth of the planet's population.

Of course, The Church of Equality respects every individual's religious liberty, and if anyone apostasizes from Equalitarianism, unlike some cults that shall remain nameless, we will immediately remove their name from our membership rolls. All one need do to renounce their membership in The Church of Equality is send a notarized letter requesting name-removal, along with a small processing fee of $99, to The Church's headquarters.

I am happy to report that in 20 years since the founding of The Church (reminder: we ask all media to use the full name of The Church; i.e., The Church of Equality" when referring to The Church for the first time in any communication, and to please use the shorthand phrase "The Church" (with a capitalized "The") when referring to The Church again in the same piece, if necessary for space considerations*), not a single person has ever undertaken the name-removal process!

Inquiring minds who do not respect the sacred nature of the work performed by volunteer Members of The Church of Equality occasionally ask for more information abou the membership activity of Members of The Church of Equality. Given the most sensitive and sacred--not secret!--nature of that work, we do not divulge such information to people who are not prepared to receive it.

But the membership numbers speak for themselves: The Church of Equality is the world's largest and fastest-growing religion.

*We also ask the media to refrain from employing the term "Equalites" to refer to members of The Church, as it is a derogatory nickname invented by enemies of The Church and is considered a hateful slur by the 8+billion members of The Church worldwide. The correct way to refer to a member of The Church is "Member of The Church of Equality," unless referring to Members of The Church who are also members of the Equalitarian Amphitheatre Choir who can properly be referred to as "Equalitarians" but only when discussing their participation in the Equalitarian Amphitheatre Choir, as that world-renowned choir was named at a time when leaders of The Church, following the advice of consultants who had conducted numerous very expensive focus groups, plastered the name "Equalitarian" on every damn thing we did, only to later be told by a different group of high-priced consultants that *their* focus groups thought the name referred to a group of people who sing while riding horseback. So, we dropped it. But because of its historical relevance, we are willing to give some leeway to the media in using the term to describe our globally recognized singers.

When I look at the 2025 statistical report reporting 385,490 baptisms...a twenty five percent increase...I see that as vitality, not propaganda as you do. Remember, the full story isn't just in attendance logs/rolls. One needs to also pay attention to the expansion of 87 new Stakes and the dedicated operation of 204 temples worldwide.

We are looking at "vitality" through different lenses. You as a nonbeliever and critic, me as a believer and observer of the overall growth and vitality of the church and the impact had upon members that have made covenants with God and are walking in obedience to His commandments.

I don't expect you or other critics to appreciate the influence the church continues to have upon good people that decide to enter the waters of baptism and move forward in faith.

Regards,
MG

[Rivendale]

I will never understand how believers look at this growth. It is like homeopathic or holy water serial dilution. Take one gallon of holy water and when it is half empty fill it with tap water and you are good to go indefinitely. Take one drop of homeopathic remedy and dilute it multiple times and it is good. Take 5 million semi active Mormons and they see one drop of conversions in Africa and hurray Hosanna shout.

[Marcus]

I will never understand how believers look at this growth. It is like homeopathic or holy water serial dilution. Take one gallon of holy water and when it is half empty fill it with tap water and you are good to go indefinitely. Take one drop of homeopathic remedy and dilute it multiple times and it is good. Take 5 million semi active Mormons and they see one drop of conversions in Africa and hurray Hosanna shout.

Add in the Texas sharpshooting aspect and anything can be twisted into evidence. 'Growth = church is true and filling the earth. Lack of growth= church is true and its selectiveness shows that'. You have to wonder what goes on in people's thought processes when they just believe, without acknowledging the flipflopping.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

The Utah numbers are tanking faster than a Jaredite submarine with a leak:

Yes. The Mormons grew 24 stakes into 4.

Still waiting for Mental to source his assertions…