2010 LDS Church statistical report


Return To Article
  • Chad S Derby, KS
    April 7, 2011 7:16 a.m.

    @Doctor, if it makes you feel better I try very hard not to contact anyone on any list that has reported a request for "no-contact." Most mormons don't like stopping by houses who don't want visits. I don't. Perhaps a strongly worded, signed letter to the bishop in your area will help you out. Do you think we just really love talking to people who don't want anything to do with us?

  • OC64 Edmonton, AB
    April 4, 2011 4:31 p.m.

    camotim - How do you know what is does with the profits from farming? As far as I know that info is not released. Maybe you can let us know what the LDS church does with the proceeds of their other investments as well. I'm curious

  • Independent Henderson, NV
    April 4, 2011 4:27 p.m.

    I suppose we are supposed to kick everyone who hasn't come to church in a while out of the church and remove them from our records? Sorry, we'll try to be a bit more exclusive and see how happy that makes everyone.

  • southmtnman Provo, UT
    April 4, 2011 1:59 p.m.

    Northern Lights,

    Apparently, I read things a bit more carefully than you did. The Scientist did not say there were only 5,000 deaths in the Church. He (or she) said that deaths only accounted for less than 5,000 names being removed from the Church records. In a later comment he (or she) explained that the Church has difficulty tracking deaths of members and tying them back to names so they can be removed. That makes sense to me.

    I have also heard researchers at BYU report that the _worldwide_ activity rate for the Church is around 33%.

    I don't understand why all the defensiveness over what the Scientist posted. The numbers seem to add up and make sense. Why is that bothersome?

  • IndependentLiberal Salt Lake City, UT
    April 4, 2011 12:51 p.m.


    You are not entirely correct is saying that Bible believing churches even remotely discipline non-active members. Most have in their constitutions (open and sitting in the foyers for anyone to read) provisions for inactivity. Most simply state that after a certain timeframe of inactivity (6 mo to 1 year) a letter is sent to ask if the if the person or persons still want their membership in the church. If they say no or the attempt to locate them fails they are deactivated. Even after one year if they express a desire to stay on the active roll, active they remain! ANYONE is welcome to come back without question to worship with us even if they dont want their memberships back. We have many folks who have worshipped with us for years and are not formal members. One must be 18 years old to be a member. It is our desire to just track our more active members to help in our various ministries. Youth, seniors, families, etc.

  • mream Parker, CO
    April 4, 2011 10:28 a.m.


    The Church has a very extensive discipline program, with excommunication being the final resort.

    I don't know about the 30% activity rate quoted... in my area (N. American West, but not Utah), Church members are around 2/3 active vs. 1/3 inactive. I'm sure it varies by country and state, but 30% seems really low to me.

  • brokenclay Scottsdale, AZ
    April 4, 2011 9:47 a.m.

    It seems like there's good points from both perspectives. Of course you don't discipline an inactive member out of the church immediately (Do Mormons have church discipline, or just excommunication?). There should be some effort to understand these people's circumstances, on a case-by-case basis, before formal measures are taken.

    But here's the bottom line. At some point, at least in Bible churches, a member who does not participate in the body has to be disciplined, which culminates in removal from membership. There is therefore something wrong with the LDS Church that has well over half of its members in inactivity. This tells me that the LDS don't have a biblical form of church discipline-- they only remove you for apostasy (excommunication), not for inactivity.

    The other good point of the "critics" is that the LDS church is definitely withholding statistics from the public. The most plausible explanation for this is that they fear the statistics would cause further damage within the ranks.

  • Gattaca Pittsburgh, PA
    April 4, 2011 9:45 a.m.

    Reporting membership numbers do not reflect the size and strength of the church. The numbers reported are just numbers. The church does keep statistical data on every aspect of the church but I do not think anyone (including yourself) wants to spend their Saturday afternoon listening to an extensive statistical analysis and financial reporting of the LDS church.

  • anotherview SLO, CA
    April 4, 2011 9:34 a.m.

    regarding the discussion about counting inactives.
    The Church knows the average meeting attendance and could report that statistic if it chose to do so. That would provide an indication of the number of inactives. I'm not sure why the Church reports the stats.

    The Church distributed 63,000 tons of food ie. 3 cargo containers or approx 2 1/2 semi truck trailers.

  • Northern Lights Louisville, KY
    April 4, 2011 7:27 a.m.


    I don't condemn your source. If anyone has access to Church-wide information, the Church Correlation Department certainly would. Based on what you presented, it might be worth a future article by the DN to research what conclusions those in charge of the Correlation Department come up with each year from their analysis.

    Still, only 5,000 deaths Church-wide doesn't seem right to me. Even if the mortality rate of Church membership was half the rate in the U.S. in general (8.38 for the U.S.), then the Church should close out approximately 58,000 membership records per year from deaths. I'd only ask you to relook that particular statistic.

  • ex missionary Sandy, UT
    April 3, 2011 10:08 p.m.

    Bill in Nebraska

    I'd be careful about calling the source of my data bogus. All of the numbers I have used in these posts come directly from the church's statistical reports. You can try it yourself, divide total converts by total missionaries and you'll get 5.22 converts per missionary. You can go to the church's 2009 statistical report, do the same thing, and see that the average was 5.41 converts per missionary.

    Also, we know that the church retains records of resigned and excommunicated members because some of these individuals come back to the church and go through a restoration of ordinances ceremony and things are put back to how they were before. There are also people who have been denied admission to BYU because they are ex. The church keeps all of the data. It is just a matter of how they classify it. One issue I have tried to raise is the church has made no definitive statement (as far as I know) regarding how the records of resigned and excommunicated members are treated in their yearly counts. If anyone knows of such a statement, I would appreciate the reference.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    April 3, 2011 8:38 p.m.

    Bill & Northern Lights,

    Shooting the messenger is bad form, and does not change the numbers. They are what they are. Do you suppose you have spiritual clairvoyance to see beyond the numbers?

    I already revealed the source of my numbers: The Research Information Division of the Correlation Department of the Church (if I lose my job, I will blame you and curse you in my prayers).

    The death rate (per thousand) in the Church has hovered a little under 1/2 the death rate of the general US population. Moreover, there is no easy or reliable process by which deaths of members are reported to the Church. With activity rates worldwide at around 30%, a large, unknown number of members die without the Church even knowing.

    The estimates of how many members have their names removed from Church records include those who request to have their names removed as well as those whose names are removed because of excommunication, among other reasons. "Death" as a reason for names being removed accounts for very few names.

    Meanwhile, the birthrate and the married rate (per thousand) have been dropping significantly over the past decade. Thus, Pres. Monson's Gen.Priesthood talk.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    April 3, 2011 8:19 p.m.

    Scientist: I have to agree with Northern Lights. The statistics you are cititng are for the most part bogus. The fact you state you will lose your job is an indication that they are extremely bogus.

    To ex-missionary: When a person resigns or is excommunicated their names are removed from the records of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. It is funny because though some feel missionary work is not effective we learn during General Conference that when members are actively involved in the missionary efforts the other is true where missionary work is totally effective. The problem is that many like scientist and ex-missionary base their stuff on information gathered by Non members of the Church and most incorrect or bogus information. This is extremely true in almost all instances. Membership clerks report monthly to the Church the number of active and inactive members. Reactivation is a Ward/Branch reposibility and happens all around the Church. Many of those as stated who are inactive are because they have Word of Wisdom issues, work on Sunday, or have other personal issues. All it takes is an effective member to change the tide.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    April 3, 2011 7:43 p.m.

    Northern Lights,

    I already identified the source of my numbers.

    To reveal any more would be to reveal who I am and for whom I work. That could cost me my job.

    My statistics are for the entire Church, worldwide. Your observations of specific Wards and specific missionaries are anecdotal, at best, and are not representative of worldwide trends. It would be foolish to trust your anecdotal observations instead of my professionally-collected, worldwide numbers. But you are free to whatever unsupported opinions you care to hold. Good luck with that.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    April 3, 2011 7:39 p.m.


    Your comment chastizes Joggle, but your comments add absolutely nothing, either.

    Hypocrites fall into the traps they set for others.

    You give the Church a bad name.

  • ex missionary Sandy, UT
    April 3, 2011 7:36 p.m.

    Northern Lights | 4:25 p.m.

    The trends of ward/branch/stake consolidation and the effectiveness of missionaries can be observed by looking at the data the church provides in these reports.

    For example, take the figure they give for total membership (a little over 14 million) and divide it by the total number of wards and branches (28,660) and you get an average of 493 members per local unit. That number (members per local unit) has been increasing every year for quite a while. It's a trend that indicates, among other things, that some consolidation is occuring.

    As far as the effectiveness of missionaries goes, all you need to do is take the number of converts and divide it by the number of missionaries. Last year each missionary baptized an average of 5.22 people. That is a slight decline compared to last year when it was 5.41 people. The number has hovered around 5 for the last decade or so but used to be higher.

    I believe scientist may have calculated the death rate wrong. He'll have to respond to that.

  • ex missionary Sandy, UT
    April 3, 2011 7:22 p.m.

    It would be nice to see some attendance statistics - maybe average, high, and low numbers. I can't consider the 14 million number to be an accurate representation of total membership because it includes:

    1 - children of record
    2 - people who have died but haven't been reclassified as not longer living, they will age off the records at the age of 110 years
    3 - people who have left the church but don't have their names removed

    It may also include members who have resigned or been excommunicated. It doesn't seem logical that it would and those members are no longer associated with the local wards or branches but we know the church does keep them on record. Members will often say they aren't counted but I've never seen a reference. If anyone knows of a reference I would love to see it.

    Reporting the membership numbers as they do is worthwhile but having actual attendance statistics as well would give a much better sense of the size and strength of the church.

  • Doctor Tucson, AZ
    April 3, 2011 6:25 p.m.

    I can tell you from personal experience the church (at least it's agents) do not react kindly when you rebuff their reactivation attempts. They also don't take no for an answer. Funny thing is, the least hassled I was was when i lived in utah (and since then as well). But from when i got married and my MIL transferred my wife's records over a 15 year period it seemed like every six months I was fending off home teachers. When i told one home teacher that my wife and I discussed it and we didn't want him calling anymore, he said he had to hear it from my wife who was sitting next to me.

  • P Central Utah, UT
    April 3, 2011 6:24 p.m.

    I am not even sure that we can agree on "active" and "inactive" mean Do we base it only at attendance (at what meeting) I know a man who has to work Sunday but is there every week for Scouts and does a great job. Do we base it on contributions, again I know one who is generous with fast offering & tithing and contributes every week, but he is never there on Sunday. On the other hand there are others who never contribute money, but they are there and always help with their time on any project.

    Let's say it is 50% attendance (you can use any figure) but that is where it hits me - I was there every week until mid summer when I had a stroke & couldn't make it there. Am I active or inactive. Gee, if I could have gone one more week, I would have been classed among "the active" vs "the inactive." Actually I think the term is "less active?" Because you do not know whether my mother in Indiana was sick and I spent the time with her does not make me "inactive" in my mind. Glad I'm not the judge!

  • TJ Eagle Mountain, UT
    April 3, 2011 6:02 p.m.

    You still hanen't offered anything of value on this board. We all know you have a bone to pick with the church and we all know that the comments from anyone here will not likely influence anyone to action. I am curious though, about how long you think someone should be inactive before they are automatically removed from the records of the church. 6 months, a year or even 5 years? If someone wants their name removed, all it takes is a signed request in no particular format to their Bishop or Branch President. This is not a difficult process and no interview is required.
    How about if we agree to disagree. Contention benefits no-one and it invites the spirit to leave.
    Have a nice day and I sincerely hope you have happiness in your life.

  • Kevin Surrey, BC
    April 3, 2011 5:12 p.m.

    to: A Scientist | 2:50 p.m. April 3, 2011 and others

    In Matthew Ch 7 we read:

    13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

    14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

    The Church is NOT trying to become the largest church in the world. The scriptures say it just won't happen. They are just trying to lead as many as will listen to the path of salvation. Salvation is a personal journey and it is not easy. The Church is preparing the world for the second coming. The good are getting better and the evil are getting worse. The Church will continue to grow the get stronger. Nothing can stop it.

  • Northern Lights Louisville, KY
    April 3, 2011 4:25 p.m.


    I ask again, what is the source of your statistics? I'm interested. I'm especially interested in the number of deaths you are claiming. This is not a statistic normally reported by the Church and seems a very low number compared just to the average US death rate of 8.38 from the US Census.

    I have been in wards and stakes across America and have not observed the trend of consolidation you are claiming, either. I am required to relocate every two to four years and have yet to move into a new ward or stake that hasn't either split or realigned boundaries within a year of our arrival. Our temple district is about to split as well. This is certainly not consolidation.

    I also have not observed your claim that missionaries are becomming less effective. Our ward saw a record number of baptisms last year.

    Again, I would love fair consideration for your statistics if you would only identify the source of your claims.

  • cstott Lehi, UT
    April 3, 2011 3:39 p.m.

    Hey joggle.......you're welcome to come back.

  • KM Cedar Hills, UT
    April 3, 2011 3:10 p.m.

    "some leave the church, yet can't leave the church alone." while others, joggle, apparently never were part of the church and still can't leave it alone.

    Joggle, you seem to have a desire to start a church of your own, seeing that you have so many ideas as to how it should be run. Is it your fear that members will no longer "follow?" follow who? May I quote the Master ... "come FOLLOW Me and you shall find rest to your souls." I have found that to be true.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    April 3, 2011 2:50 p.m.

    The Church added 306,613 members (year over year), which is about 12,000 shy of the 20 year average.

    The Church dropped 86,729 from its records, which is about 33,000 more than the 20 year average.

    These "reductions" in Church membership include a death-rate that accounts for less than 5,000 names. This leaves around 80,000 members who had their names removed from the records of the Church during 2010.

    Convert baptisms is about 11,000 short of the 20 year average, with baptisms per missionary dropping to 5.22, which is below the 20 year average.

    Meanwhile, the Church is consolidating, with Stakes and Wards becoming larger in size, as they have steadily since 1998. The average Stake and Ward sizes are significantly larger than the 20 year average.

    Not only are missionaries significantly less effective (compared to the 20 year average), but missions are shrinking in size as well as being reduced in number.

  • Lilljemalm Gilbert, AZ
    April 3, 2011 1:48 p.m.

    Children are taught the Gospel at a young age so that they can make a choice or themselves. The world teaches more of what's bad than good these days and to not teach children (or indoctrinate them to use the terms of the negative types posting), would rob them of the ability to choose for themselves. Those who argue that children shouldn't be taught are opposed to freedom of choice!

  • Lilljemalm Gilbert, AZ
    April 3, 2011 1:43 p.m.

    Baptism is a covenant with God. The Church is there to help the baptized keep their covenants. Those who choose to not keep them are not automatically removed from the records of the Church of excommunicated because they are given the chance to repent and return to full activity. The Church is for everybody. My experience has been that about half of those who become inactive reactivate at some time or other and the vast majority of those who are inactive or less active want their names to stay on the records of the Church. It's not out of respect or fear of other family members, but out of knowing where they need to be. They just need to put forth a little faith.
    This is supported by the teachings of the Savior Himself. He was sent to the sinners. His atonement is there for everyone to benefit from. That opportunity is not taken away from some one just because they aren't attending church meetings at the moment.

  • Pac_Man Pittsburgh, PA
    April 3, 2011 12:59 p.m.

    Joggle: I think you are making more out of the numbers than they really are. It is an objective measurement at one point of time. Everyone knows this, including you.

    What is interesting though is that many people like yourself feign interest in statistics reported by leaders they don't sustain and financial statements of an organization to which they don't contribute.

  • Joggle Clearfield, UT
    April 3, 2011 12:28 p.m.

    To Commentators:

    The road out of Mormonism is not an easy path and there is not one description as to why one leaves temporarily or forever. You can't generalize the reasons because they are many. It isn't always as simple as being married to a non-Mormon. Many times the decision to leave was made BEFORE ever meeting the potential non-Mormon spouse. If inactivity remains for many years (say 5)without activity it's a pretty good bet that that person is in apostasy. Why would the Church count obvious apostates? The Church does not ALWAYS/regularly ask inactive members if they want to resign. I have first hand knowledge that many don't officially resign out of respect for their LDS family, but still they don't consider themselves members.

    It is my view that the barrier that stands between Church leadership policy and proper disclosure is the leaders' fear that the members will no longer follow if all of the facts are on the table, including apostasy. This issue boils down in my view to whether a religious organization has the integrity to do what's honest! Afterall they do advertise the numbers to the_world!

  • Doctor Tucson, AZ
    April 3, 2011 11:54 a.m.

    A lot of people talk about catholics and infant baptizing. Are you aware of the sacrament called Confirmation? Catholics reaffirm their faith at 15 years old.

  • In My Humble Opinion South Jordan, UT
    April 3, 2011 11:51 a.m.


    " If I lived in a state whose dominant religion was Catholic or whatever....I would have the same objection."

    And why is that? Do you feel you have a role of governance in the affairs of others?

    "Churches should simply remove inactive people from their rolls and let them return on their own accord if they choose."

    The LDS church prefers to actively reach out in love to those people, as "a shepherd seeks out his lost sheep." There is no chest-beating pride in this. Those efforts are a matter of contemplation and conversation among members, prayer on the less-active persons' behalf and active, loving, and sometimes difficult effort. I have seen many who are eternally grateful to be recipients of those efforts.

    Children of record are just that. They are on the records of the LDS church, but not included in the membership numbers. They also are only those children whom have been blessed and their names submitted by their parents.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 3, 2011 11:30 a.m.

    "After all aren't inactive members apostates? Why would the Church count apostates as members, if not to inflate their numbers? "

    Because that just gets messy trying to figure out who to count and who not to. Like myself who might go three months without showing up before showing up back to back weeks then not showing up again for six months. Though when I use an our, my, or we type term for something church related I stop myself mid-sentence and switch it to their and consider myself a non-denominational Christian so... that's a matter of me not telling them.

  • Joggle Clearfield, UT
    April 3, 2011 10:47 a.m.


    Inactive members shouldn't be counted in ANY religion in my opinion. The LDS religion is dominant in this state so I address that particulir religion. If I lived in a state whose dominant religion was Catholic or whatever....I would have the same objection. I don't favor objecting to the LDS religion over others. I also object to ANY religion indoctrinating children into their parent's choice in religion as they are too young to really decide for themselves. Yes, I feel the same about baptized infants. I was a baptized infant! Although some members may happily return to the LDS religion....many others never do. I know many myself, so that argument is not a defense at all. I realize people who are counted as members can officially resign from the Church, but I don't think anybody should have to resign from any Church. It should be enough that they no longer participate. Churches should simply remove inactive people from their rolls and let them return on their own accord if they choose. We all know that the LDS Church keeps track of its inactive people and approaches them frequently/infrequently to gain return.

  • Aggie253 Logan, UT
    April 3, 2011 10:00 a.m.

    For everyone wondering why inactive numbers are not reported: There is too much turnover to make it worthwhile. Members often go inactive for a few months or even weeks and then come back again. A large portion of inactivity is of this variety, although there certainly are many who do not consider themselves members anymore but are still on the rolls. Another point to consider is that the hope is that even those people will eventually return. Because of these reasons, it would be a nightmare to keep meaningful statistics of inactivity, especially on a church-wide basis, and it wouldn't be particularly useful. Most Bishops, and those heavily involved in retention efforts (and ideally all members), have a general idea of how many of their flock do not participate fully. More importantly, they are aware (or at least are making every effort to be aware) of WHO those people are. Those "numbers" are not officially reported as far as I know, and it's not particularly important that they should be, as long as those whose stewardship these people fall under are aware of them and are trying to assist them in any way they can.

  • Where's Stockton ??? Bowling Green, OH
    April 3, 2011 8:51 a.m.

    @Joggle Every several years the church has every ward attempt to contact each of their inactive members or families. Which when known to be in the ward boundaries are assigned home teachers. I can't argue that hometeaching isn't 100% effective or in many cases... non existent. Sometimes... if it does exist... it is. Other it isn't. But when found they are asked if they want to have their names removed from the church records. I have participated in several of these. Of the more than 70 - or so people that I have contacted over the years I have only had 2 who requested to have their names removed. Most remained inactive...but the overwhelming reason that I found for their inactivity outside of Utah is because they are married to a non member spouse. But they don't want to have their names removed.

  • camotim Council Bluffs, IA
    April 3, 2011 6:34 a.m.

    Taxman--most, if not all, of the farm land owned by The Church is part of the Church Welfare System. Most often farmed by volunteer labor it produces food stuffs which are
    distributed, without charge, to the poor and needy through the Bishops Storehouse System, humanatarian projects including emergency relief in disaster incidents, donations to food pantries and otherwise. For instance, while the Church does not engage in directly feeding the poor and needy it contributes many food stuffs to soup kitchens and other enterprises which feed these folks such as those operated by Catholic Charities in the Salt Lake City area.

    This farmland is used for charitable purposes and does not produce much, if any, profit.
    You either lack knowledge of this mission of the Church or you wish to obsfucate that fact in an attempt to try to discredit The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

  • TJ Eagle Mountain, UT
    April 3, 2011 12:15 a.m.

    For some reason you seem to think that some who are counted as LDS shouldn't be because they don't attend services regularly or at all.
    Do the Catholics or any other Christian church not count in their membership those who joined / were baptized but no longer attend or maybe attend once or twice annually?
    Do you think they shouldn't count them?
    You say that LDS baptize their children at an age (8 yrs), when they are too young to decide for themselves. Do you feel the same way about the churches that baptize infants and count them as members of their churches?
    I have also known people who became "inactive" from the LDS church for long periods of time but eventually found their way back. They procalim indescribable joy upon their return. I sincerely hope that you will experience replacing any bitterness you may have in your life with joy in the future.
    I know Heavenly Father wishes all his children joy and happiness.
    Also; If someone requests their name be removed from the records of the LDS church, their request is granted and they are no longer counted in this number.

  • Pac_Man Pittsburgh, PA
    April 3, 2011 12:01 a.m.

    @The Taxman:
    I am sure they track all that information. I just don't think most of the people listening want to hear it. And to be honest, I really don't think you would sit through it as well.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    April 2, 2011 11:44 p.m.

    Thanks, taxman, for asking the question that I asked earlier, and which one does not see here. If we're trackin' and reportin', let's leave nothing out.

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    April 2, 2011 11:42 p.m.

    @The Taxman I seriously doubt your numbers since California is on the verge of bankruptcy.

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    April 2, 2011 11:41 p.m.

    @Joggle I think its only misleading if you are trying to find fault. The rest of us see it as a number nothing more.

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    April 2, 2011 11:12 p.m.

    But it seems like we are selectively reporting certain statistics (although I'm sure we're tracking them all). For example, as I pointed out earlier, no financial (farming) statistics are reported (although, as you know from your Old Testament studies, during the time of Joseph they tracked and reported their grain harvest statistics).

  • Digbads South Jordan, UT
    April 2, 2011 10:25 p.m.

    @ Veracity and @The Taxman--we track and report, as it is our commanded duty to do so. It is both scripturally based (even back to the time of Moses) and revelation based. That is why. It certainly isn't done to impress anyone.

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    April 2, 2011 10:15 p.m.

    I totally agree with you regarding the only important statistic. I've often wondered why we track and report on so many in our churches.

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    April 2, 2011 10:09 p.m.

    Really? I suggest you do a little simple reseach. For example, a simple perusal of USDA statistics would tell you that in 2009, California farmers alone netted $8.8 billion in profit from farm sales of $27.1 billion. Who do you think is one of the biggest farmers in California?

  • Veracity Morgan, UT
    April 2, 2011 9:51 p.m.

    The only statistic one needs to know is the position that exists between you and the Lord...

  • Joggle Clearfield, UT
    April 2, 2011 9:40 p.m.


    That makes it misleading though! Isn't growth part of the purpose of the Church? The Church knows whose participating and whose not? They could differentiate by reporting active members and inactive members. After all aren't inactive members apostates? Why would the Church count apostates as members, if not to inflate their numbers? In the Church, every member who is baptized, but later become an apostate...according to scripture would have been better off never being born? Yet, they count them? Makes a person wonder!

    Makes me wonder!

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    April 2, 2011 8:14 p.m.

    The Taxman: Billions of farming profits? Really? I don't think the aggregate "profit" of every farm in America added up to many billions of dollars.

  • mattrick78 Cedar CIty, UT
    April 2, 2011 7:38 p.m.

    Joggle: These statistics are not meant to measure spirituality or level of commitment.

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    April 2, 2011 7:33 p.m.

    What about the financial statistics?
    How many acres of agricultural land owned? How many billion in farming profits this past year? How much tithing collected and how was it spent?

  • Joggle Clearfield, UT
    April 2, 2011 5:15 p.m.

    The overall Church membership is much less since the Church counts inactive members no longer consider themselves members, but have never bothered to officially resign. Counting children of record as members before they ever have a chance to decide for themselves also inflates the numbers.

  • ex missionary Sandy, UT
    April 2, 2011 4:12 p.m.

    Understood in the context of last year's numbers

    -- 31 new Stakes
    -- 4 less Missions
    -- 236 new Wards/Branches (.82% growth rate)
    -- 393,342 new records -baptisms and children of record (2% growth rate)
    -- 86,729 (.6% of total records) records removed from last year's count -recognized deaths, timed out by reaching the age of 110(?), or possibly resignations and excommunications (while resignations and excommunications remove member names from local units, it's not clear whether or not they are included in the numbers the church publishes each Spring)
    -- Slight increase in the number of missionaries (489 more than last year)
    -- Missionaries as a percentage of overall church membership continues to decline at a barely noticeable rate (as it has for the last decade), .369% this year compared to .374% last year
    -- Missionaries averaged 5.2 baptisms each (down from 5.4 last year)

  • Timp South Jordan, UT
    April 2, 2011 3:43 p.m.

    We love numbers!