LDS Freedom Forum

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7001 ... .html?pg=2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

in 2001 Church growth was at 3.38% but it is now shrunk more than half to 1.42% growth.

Why do you think that is?

Mahonri wrote:http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7001 ... .html?pg=2

in 2001 Church growth was at 3.38% but it is now shrunk more than half to 1.42% growth.

Why do you think that is?

Here's what Denver Snuffer says about it on his blog (and I agree with him) -

"A recent trend with Latter-day Saint scholars has been the publishing of several books that try to make Mormonism seem like Protestant Evangelicalism. I do not believe the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ is much akin to anything in Historic Christianity, and thankfully very different from Protestant Evangelicals. It is instead a return of Primitive Christianity as found in the New Testament. That is quite a different thing than what Historic Christianity has become, and almost altogether alien to Evangelicalism.

I believe the Church will advance only by acknowledging the differences, explaining them and showing what great things Historic Christianity has lost. Unless we have something different and important to offer, there is no reason for anyone to become a Latter-day Saint.

The opening statement of Christ to Joseph Smith in the First Vision ought to be the point we most emphasize. It was the many defects with Historic Christianity and its creeds which provoked the Lord to open the heavens again and start this great, final work. When we neglect that message, and try to seem like another brand of Protestantism we are neglecting the only reason for our Church's existence.

I know it is not up to me. And I do not challenge the right of the leaders, whom I sustain, to make decisions. But, if I could make a scourge of ropes and drive the social scientists out of the Church Office Building, I would. I think opinion polling and focus group results are worse than meaningless, they are misleading. It is an exercise in followship, not in leadership. If you see a trend through polling, and jump in front of it, that does not make you a leader. It makes you a clever follower.

I suppose this post is nothing more than proof of my tendency to err in judgment. But it is an honest and well meaning error which isn't being tried by the Church at present. When it was tried, in the early years, the newspapers railed against us, editorial cartoons mocked us, mobs persecuted us, and in turn the Church grew in numbers so dramatic that a single set of missionaries sent to England baptized nearly 7,000 converts. The distinction caused by the persecution was valuable. Certainly not in a public relations sense, but very much in a "harvesting of souls" sense.

Sharp distinctions give the disinterested a reason to consider our message. Persecution attracts the honest who want to know why the persecution is happening. Joseph believed, and history has proven that persecution is the heritage of the righteous. Its absence may not really be a good thing. The cost of trying to avoid it is at the expense of forward progress. This is evidenced by the decrease in convert baptisms we see at present.

I have never seen any statement in scripture affirming that becoming popular in the eyes of the world was good or desirable. On the contrary, I see the Book of Mormon listing that as one of the great evils. (See e.g., 1 Ne. 22: 23.)"

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2010/ ... ution.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You know, when you have Mormons on Facebook and in forums discussing openly the best types of birth control to use then I think that explains a lot of the slowing of our growth. Also, if a couple in 1975 had six kids and 2 generally became innactive, just think the impact when a family in 2011 only has 3 kids and 1 goes innactive.

We will be lucky to maintain the numbers we have today with such worldly attitudes. Heck, in the future you may have groups like the FLDS buying empty LDS chapels since they are growing like crazy while...

Fiannan wrote:You know, when you have Mormons on Facebook and in forums discussing openly the best types of birth control to use then I think that explains a lot of the slowing of our growth. Also, if a couple in 1975 had six kids and 2 generally became innactive, just think the impact when a family in 2011 only has 3 kids and 1 goes innactive.

We will be lucky to maintain the numbers we have today with such worldly attitudes. Heck, in the future you may have groups like the FLDS buying empty LDS chapels since they are growing like crazy while...

+1

I read that article last week that reported this growth number. I think it was a number just for North America

Vision wrote:I read that article last week that reported this growth number. I think it was a number just for North America

point still stands

Mahonri wrote:

Fiannan wrote:You know, when you have Mormons on Facebook and in forums discussing openly the best types of birth control to use then I think that explains a lot of the slowing of our growth. Also, if a couple in 1975 had six kids and 2 generally became innactive, just think the impact when a family in 2011 only has 3 kids and 1 goes innactive.

We will be lucky to maintain the numbers we have today with such worldly attitudes. Heck, in the future you may have groups like the FLDS buying empty LDS chapels since they are growing like crazy while...

+1

+2.

Maybe if we got a Latter-day Saint as U.S. President.....one who has the integrity to abide by all principles of morality and of the original US Constitution and speak fearlessly about Church tenets when given the opportunity.

Tight places.

We have doubled our convert baptisms in our ward and mission over the last 2 years. The thing I think was really working for us was a missionary-leadership correlation meeting each week with a member of each auxiliary presidency. In that meeting the missionaries reviewed all the investigators and new members and we made sure everyone was getting fellowshipping, new member discussions, home and visiting teaching, and callings. We would hold this meeting 30 min. prior to the start of youth activities on Wednesday nights.

However, with the new Handbook of Instruction, this meeting is no more, and we are trying to be give all this attention to investigators and new members in Ward Council.

In my 51 years a member of the Church, I never felt the First Presidency or the Apostles were striving to attain popularity for the Church. As I see it now, it is good will they are striving for, not popularity, at least as I understand the difference. However, at lower levels of leadership and among the general membership I do detect a striving for popularity, even at the expense of compromising certain standards. I suspect this accounts for most of the disappointing activity rate, whatever it is now.

Also realize that with a constant number of conversions, as the number of members increases, the growth rate will decrease. But I don’t see that accounting for the entire decline in growth rate.

JulesGP wrote:

Mahonri wrote:http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7001 ... .html?pg=2

in 2001 Church growth was at 3.38% but it is now shrunk more than half to 1.42% growth.

Why do you think that is?

SO why do YOU think that is Mahonri?

) stirring the pot?

I'll bite. as I see it, the more we become like everyone else, the less reasons there are for people to see us as a restoration, and the less reason for them to give up Sundays and 10%+ of their income.

The more we say "we're Christian just like you!" The more people will say "then why should we join you?"

lundbaek wrote:In my 51 years a member of the Church, I never felt the First Presidency or the Apostles were striving to attain popularity for the Church. As I see it now, it is good will they are striving for, not popularity, at least as I understand the difference. However, at lower levels of leadership and among the general membership I do detect a striving for popularity, even at the expense of compromising certain standards. I suspect this accounts for most of the disappointing activity rate, whatever it is now.

Also realize that with a constant number of conversions, as the number of members increases, the growth rate will decrease. But I don’t see that accounting for the entire decline in growth rate.

And...don't forget to add a lot of people looking for reasons to be offended.

I thought it was a much simpler reason: People just don't have as much use for religion in their lives anymore.

durangout wrote:I thought it was a much simpler reason: People just don't have as much use for religion in their lives anymore.

I would say that was true IF it wasn't for the fact that the "Christian" religions that don't try to look like mainstream Christianity are actually increasing their growth rate.

As a missionary, I have had some success at member retention/reactivation, but never yet at conversion. I associate fairly often with non-members in the political arena who espouse and promote the principles of the original US Constitution. I have tried to use the tenet of our faith that the Lord established the Constitution of America and that Latter-day Saints have a divinely mandated duty to help maintain it and the freedoms it was intended to afford us, to interest certain individuals in the Church. Unfortunately, certain prominent members in the political arena are more of a hinderance than a help. And frankly, few members can even converse on that aspect of LDS doctrine.

lundbaek wrote: Unfortunately, certain prominent members in the political arena are more of a hinderance than a help. And frankly, few members can even converse on that aspect of LDS doctrine.

+1

SIN?

Immorality, material/financial speculation (seeking after riches), and intellectualism.

lundbaek wrote:In my 51 years a member of the Church, I never felt the First Presidency or the Apostles were striving to attain popularity for the Church. As I see it now, it is good will they are striving for, not popularity, at least as I understand the difference. However, at lower levels of leadership and among the general membership I do detect a striving for popularity, even at the expense of compromising certain standards. I suspect this accounts for most of the disappointing activity rate, whatever it is now.

Also realize that with a constant number of conversions, as the number of members increases, the growth rate will decrease. But I don’t see that accounting for the entire decline in growth rate.

Agreed. The brethren constantly take positions opposed to political correctness. However the local leaders, while not perfect, are also striving in a very difficult environment to keep the saints on the right track. Many are anxiously engaged to do their best. My observation in my ward is the majority are very good people who give their all in their callings and try raise their families in righteousness. In a wicked world the field is just not as white. Men compelled to be humble through trials and afflictions will repent and turn to the Lord. BofM 101.

Again, we need to both keep our youth involved as well as encourage them to have the kind of families that were standard in 1970. If we don't we will wind up in the same situation as mainstream Protestant churches that are generally senior citizen social groups.

Our area missionaries have gone from two full-time Elder and one Sister pair to only one full-time Elder pair. Our Ward is growing from 'move-ins', but there have been only 2 conversion baptisms in the past couple of years.

Someone mentioned 'taking offense' being a reason for the shrinking numbers. I've always thought that line of thinking serves as the two-edged sword of justification; it serves the one 'taking offense' to leave the 'fellowship of the Saints', as well as excuses the 'offender' for his/her lack of good manners in the exercise Christian Charity. People WILL STAY where they feel loved and accepted.

The reasons for the different church marketing programs are because the church has hired out some different marketing firms and have conducted research as to what would be an effective way to expose people to the church. It is not any sort of act of desperation or number boosts for the church authorities. It's simply an opportunity to dabble in different exposure approaches. Many of the new programs aren't necessarily inspired either. They're simply an attempt to do something different.

The field is white and already to harvest. Some people still need some seeds planted. Some communities need to be plowed before that can even be done.

The reasons for the different church marketing programs are because the church has hired out some different marketing firms and have conducted research as to what would be an effective way to expose people to the church. It's simply an opportunity to dabble in different exposure approaches. Many of the new programs aren't necessarily inspired either. They're simply an attempt to do something different.

My! I guess simply letting one's 'light shine' doesn't cut it anymore?

If what you say is true, I have to wonder how many sick and afflicted could have been assisted with the money used to hire Madison Avenue...

Mahonri wrote:

durangout wrote:I thought it was a much simpler reason: People just don't have as much use for religion in their lives anymore.

I would say that was true IF it wasn't for the fact that the "Christian" religions that don't try to look like mainstream Christianity are actually increasing their growth rate.

But remember, it is more conducive to a lot of people's lifestyle to join other Christian churches because they can just join and "be Christian" but still participate in certain vices. Joining the LDS Church requires more sacrifice and participation.