- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
LookingHard wrote:Gerald wrote:Quote:
Nice write-up Gerald. I really worry for the church that if some things don’t change that the church will start really shrinking here and growing in areas that need lots of $. The church has been VERY (overly) financial conservative for many decades now (probably due to nearly being bankrupted in the past). As much as has been stockpiled, enough drain for enough years and things will be different. I fear if they try and change some things at that point, the prospects of really increasing the membership in places like the US will be greatly decreased as the only Mormon’s left are the paranoid, “we are victims” type folks that no “I’m a Mormon” campaign will make appealing. So sad.
I have thought about this myself. SOME of the decisions made must be made with at least one eye on the dollar (and not because the Church is avaricious). The Church has a lot of balls to juggle (temples, schools, missionary work, etc.) and significant dips in revenue can potentially affect their mission.
My understanding is that much of the surge in missionaries has ended up in the US (some due to holding them until visa’s are approved). I have heard some talk about how there is some “targeting” of missionaries to higher income locations. I live in a rather well-to do area and even though we finally have had full time missionaries and even sisters at that, the baptisms have been very minimal. People by and large are very religious and very happy. Within my subdivision (maybe 12 sq miles) there are about 6 churches and within a 5 minute drive there is a mega church (and one more on the way) and a huge catholic church that is so packed for most of the mass times that they have a policeman for traffic all day Sunday. They all have thriving communities (even some LDS have left to join them and say they are very happy).But I think we (I) might be taking this thread to a different tangent than DBMormon wants.
We did have an investigator in an exceptionally rich part of town, but in general this is not the rule. We do have professionals who are members, but the bigger uptake seems to be amongst the working class.
Let me reprhase: Those who look for fights are not welcome; neither are those who openly attack a dominant belief. There are fighters, and there are defenders – and, although sometimes those two things are the same thing, often they are not.
As always, local congregations and leaders vary radically. That is sad, but it also is unavoidable. As Hawk said, “Flawed people in a flawed community . . .” We can’t get around that, and part of that is because we are part of that.
DBMormon wrote:What if the fighter is only fighting for his space?
Of course this depends on the specifics of the situation. Sometimes one person’s space or medicine is poison to another viewpoint. When differing perspectives within an organization are fundamentally at odds one will win the majority and the other will be cast out. Everything by degrees, history does demonstrate a drift. When we believe the future is on our side we must be patient.
Orson wrote:When we believe the future is on our side we must be patient.
Wise counsel, but having crossed the big “50” year old yard line (along with life expectancy within my family tree) and I can only expect about another 15 or 20 years here, I do feel some urgency to move things along for the benefit of my kids and grandkids. I want to leave this world (and this church) a better place than when I found it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.