We just returned from our yearly-ish pilgrimage to Utah. Trips to Utah are always an opportunity to stick my finger in the air to get a more subjective, qualitative sense of things are going in the Church. Of course, Utah does not equal the Church in so many ways, but it does act as a sort of financial and membership ballast, and the amount of Mormon-ness in Utah is big enough that one can notice trends and patterns that would be harder to discern from random noise with a smaller sample size. However, here I’m not backing up any of these conjectures with quantitative data, it’s just my own anecdotal sense that may or may not be right, for what it’s worth.
Back in my day Utahns could basically be separated out into three groups: members, whether active or not, ex-members, and never members. Typically but not always there were tensions between the first two groups, and ex-members either moved to Salt Lake Valley or left Utah altogether. The ex-Mormon identity was a very reified, concrete thing. It could hardly be otherwise with a relatively high-tension, high demand religion like the Church.
Now I’m noticing another group, the second-generation ex-members. Some are what immigration scholars would call “generation 1.5,” or people who are born in one country as children but moved to another country young enough that for all intentions and purposes the UK/the US/whatever is the only country that they’ve known. The religious counterpart here would be people attending primary/YW/YM, then their parents leave along with their kids. The singer Jewel or Actress Amy Adams fit into this category. With the Great Internet Exodus I suspect there are a lot of these “generation 1.5” ex-members in Utah. A lot of time has passed and I get the sense that, if you were going to leave with your whole family over Book of Abraham or LGBTQ issues, you would have done so by now, plus people are just having fewer children now, so this “generation 1.5” group of five kid families all leaving is a one-off phenomenon.
However, enough time has passed since The Great Internet Exodus that I am noticing another religious demographic in Utah: 2nd or 3rd-generation ex-members. This group does not have “ex-Mormon” in their social media bios, they fold their arms and bow their heads out of politeness for the family reunion prayers, and if their kids or family members returned to the Church they wouldn’t particularly mind. They might even have a sort of respect for the structure and stability provided by the Church even if they themselves have no desire. They still swim in member water occasionally, and might even show up to a church meeting if a friend’s friend is leaving on their mission. There is a particular kind of 8th kid of a ten-kid super orthodox family that is overrepresented in online ex-Mormon discourse–these are not one of those.
On a related note, like others I have been surprised at the number of new missions in Utah. These missions do not make a lot of sense when viewed from the former paradigm of members, ex-members for whom missionaries would not help, and a small number of never-members. However, the increase in never-members in Utah, combined with this new religious sociodemographic, actually means that there is a critical mass of people for whom missionary work might be effective, especially when taking into account the ample resources of local wards (we have a hard time fellowshipping RCs in my local ward, I suspect Utah wards don’t have the same problems), and Utah missions presumably benefit from the Starkian dynamics where somebody’s probability of conversion is proportional to the number of network ties somebody has to a faith.
In a sense this new Utah paradigm could an ideal. There are enough members that people are likely to at least consider the possibility, to open up the door to faith and not to dismiss it out of hand. But there isn’t so much of a monopoly that membership is a genetic inheritance, with the few that break out of their genetic inheritance shunned enough that they become a whole other thing—the Ex-Mormon. It is providing the opportunity to embrace the gospel without sociocultural coercion to do so, making agency more operative in religious decision-making.
This isn’t “new”. Back when I was a kid and your parents probably weren’t born yet, many families of pioneers still held family reunions. We had the Johnson reunion who were descendants of the family of Ezekiel Johnson, who all 17 siblings joined the church. Benjamin F Johnson was a close personal friend of Joseph Smith and was among those siblings. We had the Scott Family, descendants of Provo’s first Mayor. These were some supper large polygamous families of which I am generation #6, coming from the line that was youngest son of youngest son of youngest son of the youngest son of wife #5. Still attending the reunion were large branches of those who had left the church. So, three and four generations out of the church already, still living in Utah and a few still attending the reunions. There were kids that I knew at school as nonmembers, who were distant cousins. And this was back in the 1950s. So, part of Utah’s population has long been those who come from “pioneer stock” and their great great grandparents left the church.
I don’t find this persuasive as my experience is similar to Anna’s. My grandfather’s family came from Nauvoo; my grandfather himself was an angry, bitter anti-Mormon. The changes I personally have seen:
1. I’m in a tiny minority as an active member of the church.
2. The anger and animosity have largely subsided, similar to the OP sentiment.
3. Losing the anger does not signal any openness to the church. My family members are not angry or bitter anymore, but they definitely don’t want anything to do with the church. That is true down to the 4th generation from my grandfather. The 5th generation is too young as yet to know.
I do recognize that the plural of anecdote is not data, so my experience might not be worth anything.
All that sounds reasonable. Of course, multi-generational ex-Mormons aren’t new in the sense that they haven’t been around before, just that there may have been an uptick in the size of that socioreligious demographic in Utah and, if so, that combined with the increasing number of never-Mos new Utah missions make more sense than they would have 20 years ago.
actually, the quote is “the plural of anecdote is data” (Raymond Wolfinger)
Hmmm… I think the dynamic is more complex than portrayed here.
In my non-Jello-belt area, the only ones listening to the missionaries and getting baptized are a very different demographic than the ward members or the No-Mo-LDS-connected youth. The investigators/converts tend to be super low-income, often with challenges. Then they only stick around a few months to a year. We’ve had a ton of these lately. Those in the middle-income demographics have no interest, even those who have lots of LDS friends. Is that different in Utah, etc.?
Also, the church is already having a hard time holding onto the youth growing up in the church. What I’m seeing is that it’s not because of church history/internet fallout as with the older adults, but rather because of sexism, LGBTQ policy, and boredom. Unless a youth is already inline with the church’s ideals on these issues, I can’t see there being much interest. Are the No-Mo-LDS-connected youth in the Jello-belt already inline with these issues? (Definitely not in my area. For one thing, most non-LDS girls that fall in the LDS-connected demographics have never experienced sexism, ever.)
Then there’s the general move away from organized religion by the younger generations as they fulfill the same needs in other ways. How does the missionary program compete when these kids all can see non-organized religious people’s lives are just as good/fulfilled as organized-religion people’s lives?
(Not looking for answers, just like asking interesting questions!)
“For one thing, most non-LDS girls that fall in the LDS-connected demographics have never experienced sexism, ever”
Lol.
Genuine question. Why do you find that funny? Isn’t it a good thing…?
I’m finding it funny that you think that non-LDS girls have never experienced sexism.
I was speaking of institutional sexism, which seems like it should be clear.
Do you find there is a lot of institutional sexism in the lives of middle income (hate to say it, but white) girls in the US? Perhaps CA is ahead of the curve on this one and I’m just not aware.
The truth is that Utah’s path regarding inactives is quite different than that of other external communities. It would be interesting to know, for example, what it is like in Mexico, which could be one of the places in Latin America where the church is oldest, or what is currently happening in England or Europe.
In Chile, for example, there is a very large proportion of inactive people, say 80% of the total membership. The church is little more than 50 years old and the children of inactive members can be classified more or less into children of inactive members who only participated briefly in the Church, children of former inactive members who did participate for a long time in the Church, and children of former inactive members who participated for a long time in the Church. In reality, some relatives and friends of their parents are members of the Church, but we do not have many children of members who resent the Church and have abandoned it. In general, people are not inactive these days so much because of doctrinal issues, but rather because of differences within the Latter-day Saint community or because they are losing interest in religion.
“How does the missionary program compete when these kids all can see non-organized religious people’s lives are just as good/fulfilled as organized-religion people’s lives?”
Exactly! Relevance. This is the essential question the Church must address in this moment, and not just for kids. The answer is not temples and ordinances for dead people, though that has its place. We must anxiously engage in the world by deploying missionaries and members in promoting the following gospel values that have current world-wide relevance and appeal:
God is charity: create infrastructure and organizations dedicated to charitable projects around the world, eg hunger, housing, disease, etc., staffed by missionaries and partnering with local do-gooders.
God is intelligence: expansion of church-sponsored universities, research foundations, aim for academic excellence, make these universities attractive and open to more non-members.
Earth is God’s creation: we participate in creation and have stewardship of the earth. Create a church environmental organization, partnering with the above universities to develop energy solutions and conservation projects.
Gathering of Israel: all families of the earth are to be blessed. We need a movement toward including anyone and everyone at all levels of commitment, all genders, cultures. Lead on refugee assistance.
Yes we have the money to do all the above, and people young and old would be looking for ways to join with us without requiring 18 year olds to knock on doors for 10 hours a day.
As I think about the handful of converts in my Utah ward over the past 10 years, they have all been teens or young adults whose parents or grandparents had been members. I think most non-Mormons in Utah have LDS heritage or LDS family members.
This reminds me of one of my brothers. I remember a few years ago, when he and I were in my car. He wanted to talk to me about something. The rest of the family didn’t know yet at the time, but he told me about his lack of belief in God. It was very devastating for me! My brother and I have been best friends for years ever since he was born, so to see him go down another path really broke my heart. The main reason he confessed to me first was because I was seen by him as the most understanding and sympathetic of the family. He eventually confessed to the whole family about it and while they were disappointed, they still expressed a lot of love for him! Even though he sadly has no desire to come back (at least for now), he still loves me and the rest of the family and still respects our belief in the Gospel. I do hope someday he changes his mind, but my brother will always have a place in my heart! It’s never too late!