Stats on members leaving?

[Thoughtful]

I am actually in Tooele County, just west of Salt Lake and I live in Stansbury Park, Rob4Hope, so I am not far from Salt Lake at all. We have lived out here for about 20 years and seen some fairly significant population growth. So I have to remember that much of the church growth out here is because people are migrating to this valley.

With low housing costs compared to Salt Lake Valley and not too bad of a commute time for those working in Salt Lake (many people here), we have seen the community grow from around 1800 in the 90s to over 6000 now. Our stake center when we moved in was in Grantsville and there was a ward in Wendover that was part of it. After much splitting and reorganizing over the years, there is a stake center within walking distance just south of me and another about two miles north of me. With so many move ins, it is very hard to get a pulse on real growth or decline for the church in the area.

I do know that in the south part of Tooele City, there was a stake that reorganized boundaries and reduced the number of wards by one. That is in an area where there is not a lot of new housing development and it was interesting to find that took place.

More anecdotal stats on me though... I have a couple of older sisters, who were VERY committed and both have totally quit attending. One is out (i.e. just sent in resignation using quitmormon.com) and all of her adult children and their families do not attend (some may have resigned, I don't know. The other sister is inactive now with no desire to return. Two of her three adult children and their families no longer attend either. It's quite a few people!

I lived in Tooele a few years ago, up on the east bench in Tooele proper. I know a handful of LDS families who have left or become significantly more nuanced. I also think Laurie Hall was a shelf breaker for a few people. I know of a few people in bishoprics saying they aren't sure they believe any of it, but going along for cultural/ family/ social reasons.

[Rob4Hope]

I lived in Tooele a few years ago, up on the east bench in Tooele proper. I know a handful of LDS families who have left or become significantly more nuanced. I also think Laurie Hall was a shelf breaker for a few people. I know of a few people in bishoprics saying they aren't sure they believe any of it, but going along for cultural/ family/ social reasons.

There is too much of this anecdotal evidence to just dismiss this. It makes sense to me why the higher-ups lie and protect membership stat records,...but I would think its kindof ironic,..you know a little,...that a church that touts so much about honesty will itself break rules.

This membership deal is but the tip of the iceberg....

[JustHangingOn@57]

I live in Alpine, Utah. I'm here to say that as far as the adults are concerned, nobody in my ward is leaving. There is a stake wide concern, though, that many young people are quietly leaving.

[Rob4Hope]

I live in Alpine, Utah. I'm here to say that as far as the adults are concerned, nobody in my ward is leaving. There is a stake wide concern, though, that many young people are quietly leaving.

I have family in HighLand out there by Alpine. That is a STRONG MORMON CENTER out there JHO. I get a "mormon" feeling when I drive south around the point-of-the-mountain, and start moving toward Orem area.

I don't want to be negative with this...but it feels kindof suffocating to me. Sorry to be blunt.

[Gatorbait]

Although I've not much to do with the church, apart from going to an occasional baby blessing or the like, I see no need to officially resign.

What's the point? There's nothing that can come of it that serves any purpose says I. As my dear departed Dad used to say "It's all bull s***". I agree. Anything that is built on the principles of B.S. is just that. It's like saying that you no longer believe in the Easter Bunny. Okay, settle down lad, you say, the Easter Bunny is at least not one to destroy families and create problems, you say. Okay I'll give you that. The Easter Bunny, well we will just leave well enough alone and say we believe in him...er...or is the Easter Bunny female...or...heaven forbid- a trans.....gasp....transsexual. Or, even worse- no sex at all! Goodness gracious- no baby Easter Bunnies? No future tithe payers? Gasp again!

Enough already huh, but seriously, does anyone know if temple work has been performed on the Easter Bunny? Or, do we wait for the Easter Bunny to die? Please tell me that the Easter Bunny isn't off limits because of the Holocaust. Don't want to fall down that slippery slop. Probably have to wait for the revelation that tells the sex of the Easter Bunny before we have to worry about that huh. (sigh)

[Palerider]

Although I've not much to do with the church, apart from going to an occasional baby blessing or the like, I see no need to officially resign.

What's the point? There's nothing that can come of it that serves any purpose says I. As my dear departed Dad used to say "It's all bull s***". I agree. Anything that is built on the principles of B.S. is just that. It's like saying that you no longer believe in the Easter Bunny. Okay, settle down lad, you say, the Easter Bunny is at least not one to destroy families and create problems, you say. Okay I'll give you that. The Easter Bunny, well we will just leave well enough alone and say we believe in him...er...or is the Easter Bunny female...or...heaven forbid- a trans.....gasp....transsexual. Or, even worse- no sex at all! Goodness gracious- no baby Easter Bunnies? No future tithe payers? Gasp again!

Enough already huh, but seriously, does anyone know if temple work has been performed on the Easter Bunny? Or, do we wait for the Easter Bunny to die? Please tell me that the Easter Bunny isn't off limits because of the Holocaust. Don't want to fall down that slippery slop. Probably have to wait for the revelation that tells the sex of the Easter Bunny before we have to worry about that huh. (sigh)

After asking local officials several times not to contact me for their own benefit (I tell them face to face the church is a fraud) they still kept calling and sending people to our home. The last call from the ward secretary the guy told me I ought to get in or get out.

I think he was probably surprised to hear of my resignation letter a couple days later.

Things have been much more quiet since then. No more visits, no more calls.

[Coop]

According to the data in a leaked 2008 video presentation on Mormonleaks the demographic most at risk of going inactive are young single adults. The data showed that the current activity rate for North America is 30% and for the rest of the world it is 20%.

A draft of a document also from Mormonleaks showed that over 50% of 851,000 young single adults were inactive as of 2004. So things are getting worse.

Church growth last year according to the statistical report read in General Conference was 1.58%. Year to year baptisms are down, the birth rate is down and the only rate that is going up is the death rate. If this trend continues within a few years the Church overall will experience negative growth.

In 2008 the Church in Canada membership actually declined.

Gives you something to think about if you happen to attend an upcoming first Sunday Priesthood and Relief Society council meeting.

[slavereeno]

In 2008 the Church in Canada membership actually declined.

That's it. I'm moving to Canada. Hockey, less church, maple syrup and nice people, lets go.

[Rob4Hope]

According to the data in a leaked 2008 video presentation on Mormonleaks the demographic most at risk of going inactive are young single adults. The data showed that the current activity rate for North America is 30% and for the rest of the world it is 20%.

A draft of a document also from Mormonleaks showed that over 50% of 851,000 young single adults were inactive as of 2004. So things are getting worse.

Church growth last year according to the statistical report read in General Conference was 1.58%. Year to year baptisms are down, the birth rate is down and the only rate that is going up is the death rate. If this trend continues within a few years the Church overall will experience negative growth.

In 2008 the Church in Canada membership actually declined.

Gives you something to think about if you happen to attend an upcoming first Sunday Priesthood and Relief Society council meeting.

I think its a matter of time before there will be negative growth and from that, strange adjustments by the leadership to shore things up. They are trying now in strange ways--IE, young men being allowed to baptize in the temple, not just be proxy.

I wonder what the numbers are for young-women who are leaving? It seems some of a lot of the statistics focus on men. Am I wrong in this?....

Are there any numbers or indications on the gender of those leaving?

[Mormorrisey]

In 2008 the Church in Canada membership actually declined.

That's it. I'm moving to Canada. Hockey, less church, maple syrup and nice people, lets go.

Pretty freakin' cold, though. As a disinterested observer. Although it is a fun place to be!

[Jeffret]

I wonder what the numbers are for young-women who are leaving? It seems some of a lot of the statistics focus on men. Am I wrong in this?....

Are there any numbers or indications on the gender of those leaving?

Anecdotally or generically: It's long been the case that young men tend to leave church, or the Mormon church, in particular much more than young women. In a number of ways, churches have been more attractive to women than men. A lot of this is because of the myriad ways women and girls have been socialized to be more social. Churches kind of use women's involvement as a way to entice the men. In a way, men get more out of religion, because most religions limit the prestige and the power to men, but men are socialized to be more independent and so it is easier for them to leave a church or choose not to be involved.

It appears that in more recent years that is shifting a bit. A number of reports from Mormon leaders state that young women are leaving the church in increasing numbers. Similar things seem to be occurring in other churches. If churches have greater trouble retaining the women, that creates a spiral effect, where they have also then have greater trouble retaining the men.

All of this is speaking on average and not about actual differences between men and women but about statistical differences in how they behave in our society.

I'd like to see actual numbers on how this breakdowns, but I'm not aware of any. The PRRI report doesn't show this information. The Pew study shows a number of different breakdowns by gender, but I can't figure out how to extract out any useful patterns. What I would really like to see is a breakdown along two axes, gender and age / generation. I suspect that women in the older generations are more religious with a marked decline, particularly among women in the younger ones.

[wtfluff]

Truth: There's only a select few who are employees of The Corporation of the President™ who know the real "stats" about members leaving, activity rates of members, and growth (positive or negative.)

I doubt anyone on the outside will ever see any of the actual numbers.

I have no doubt that the church will have no problem getting creative statistically (translation: lie) in the general conference "annual report" to make the "numbers" look good...

[Jeffret]

Truth: There's only a select few who are employees of The Corporation of the President™ who know the real "stats" about members leaving, activity rates of members, and growth (positive or negative.)

I doubt they really know, either. There are certainly some statistics known by a handful of people there that would be very useful to know. But, it's likely there are some data and understandings that they really don't have a clue about. The Church keeps statistics on some things but there are others that they just seem oblivious to. Some they just don't bother with. Some they don't want to know. And some that would just be more work. They must have good numbers on how many formally resign. They know something about participation levels, though it's unclear they really know to interpret those aggregate numbers well. They probably don't really have a good handle on how many are leaving and why. When they lose track of people they continue to count them as members till they would have reached 110 years old. A useful metric is how many people consider themselves Mormons. That's one of the primary figures used by survey groups like Pew and PRRI. The Church doesn't seem to have ready access to that info on their unknown and it's unclear they really want to know that answer.

[wtfluff]

They must have good numbers on how many formally resign.

They know exactly how many people have formally resigned. Either that, or their database of "members" is completely useless.

Any doubt? Try getting excommunicated, or resigning, then getting re-baptized. They'll instantly have all your information about your previous "membership" and know exactly what ordinances you need to have re-instated.

They know something about participation levels, though it's unclear they really know to interpret those aggregate numbers well.

They have a very clear definition of what an "active" member is. They receive statistics from every "unit" in the church quarterly I believe. Ask any ward clerk.

They also have a very clear "guestimate" of how many folks attend sacrament meeting, and how many "members" are on the roster of each ward, which tells them a percentage of attending "members". Again, ask any ward clerk.

These two statistic give a pretty clear picture of "who's leaving".

They probably don't really have a good handle on how many are leaving and why.

See above as to "how many are leaving".

As to why? Well, that's not a numerical statistic that they are interested in, or they'd figure out a way to get their unpaid statisticians (clerks) to get that information.

Again: Ask any ward clerk, and they have at their fingertips: Number of members in the unit. Numbers of people attending Sacrament meeting. Number of "active" members (I believe that this would just be for adults.) Also not mentioned: Number of recommend holders, and number of ACTIVE recommend holders. (And a bunch of other reports...)

ALL of these statistics are transferred to Headquarters regularly, and if the reports don't get transferred, Clerks get nasty-grams from Headquarters.

[Jeffret]

They know exactly how many people have formally resigned. Either that, or their database of "members" is completely useless.

Any doubt? Try getting excommunicated, or resigning, then getting re-baptized. They'll instantly have all your information about your previous "membership" and know exactly what ordinances you need to have re-instated.

A favorite saying of one of my former bosses was that looking for errors in a database is like looking for water in the ocean. Indications are the Church has its own fair share or database issues, particularly among those who have left, or are otherwise missing. They've probably got the list of formal resignations pretty close.

They know something about participation levels, though it's unclear they really know to interpret those aggregate numbers well.

They have a very clear definition of what an "active" member is. They receive statistics from every "unit" in the church quarterly I believe. Ask any ward clerk.

They also have a very clear "guestimate" of how many folks attend sacrament meeting, and how many "members" are on the roster of each ward, which tells them a percentage of attending "members". Again, ask any ward clerk.

These two statistic give a pretty clear picture of "who's leaving".

Possibly. Based upon my time as ward clerk, I'm not sure how good those numbers are overall. And as you note, they only collect that data quarterly, which leaves a bit of room for error. Local units benefit by having higher sacrament meeting counts, so it wouldn't be surprising if they "round up" whenever possible.

When I was ward clerk, I pestered the EQP repeatedly the first month to get his home teaching numbers. Our report was overdue by the time he got me some. I presumed they were somewhat fabricated when I did get them. After that we adopted the dance: 1) I ask for the numbers, 2) he promises to get them for me, 3) he doesn't get around to it, 4) the due date gets close, 5) I make up a number somewhere in the range of the original number he gave me. The first one was the only one I ever got from him, but I have no reason to believe the ones I made up were any worse or better than that one.

When I first asked the Primary secretary for their numbers, I received the answer, 100%. I questioned that number. I knew there were families with kids who didn't attend. She tried to explain something about how they base their percentages off those that are active. So 100% of those that were active were active that quarter. I started to blurt out something about how they couldn't do it that way and stopped myself, realizing I really didn't care. I reported the numbers they gave me every quarter. That's the way the Primary in that ward had been doing it for years and probably still are.

When the data gets up to the church-wide levels it's riddled with any variety of errors like this. With that kind of aggregate data it can get difficult to extract meaningful interpretations. They've got counts or percentages. They can track changes to those. That can result in interesting comparisons but it can be hard to tell just what they mean.

They end up with a bunch of different numbers that give a pretty foggy picture of who is attending. In aggregate. What they really lack is good information about who is leaving or has left. And most significantly, they know next to nothing about why. The clerks can count those who are there, but have a harder time counting those who aren't. The data they collect says pretty much nothing about "why" on anything and when it comes to those that have left they have very little information. Dehlin's survey "Understanding Mormon Disbelief" is probably the best collection of data around on why people leave, though it has significant flaws. (The biggest one is that only covers certain types of people who have left. There are big portions that are missing.)

[wtfluff]

Possibly. Based upon my time as ward clerk, I'm not sure how good those numbers are overall. And as you note, they only collect that data quarterly, which leaves a bit of room for error. Local units benefit by having higher sacrament meeting counts, so it wouldn't be surprising if they "round up" whenever possible.

<snippity snip>

So, as a former ward clerk, and given the fact that the default is even to "round up" I'll take a wild guess and say: You know that the "number of people attending sacrament" (even with the "round up" errors) vs. the number of members in the ward is dismal at best.

This is why us normal folks will never see those sorts of statistics. The rounding errors are usually on the side of making attendance look "better" and the statistics of percentage of attending folks is dismal.

As to the rest of the statistics mentioned, accurate or not, pretty much all of them will paint the same dismal picture. Nope, it doesn't say who is leaving or why, but it does say: The majority do not attend. I'll go ahead and make a "wild guess" and also say: The majority of those non-attenders have left.


Here's an interesting statistic that hasn't been mentioned, that I'd bet is pretty accurate: Tithe payers. That's one thing The Corporation doesn't mess around with: Money $$$. There's an accurate list of folks who have given $$$ to the church. I'd love to see that number compared to the total membership that they claim. Personally, I'd bet some $$ that the number of tithe payers, compared to the total number of members is dismal. That would also be a fairly decent way to see how many members actually "profess" to believe with their pocket books, as opposed to everyone who got dunked at some point in the last 110 years.

[Jeffret]

Here's an interesting statistic that hasn't been mentioned, that I'd bet is pretty accurate: Tithe payers.

That's a good one. Counts of tithe payers and money are probably the most accurate numbers. Full tithe payer numbers are much less reliable.