Change in interest in church during the pandemic part III: Comparison between churches

How has interest in different churches changed during the coronavirus pandemic? This is a question that occurred to me while I was working on my last couple of posts where I looked at Google Trends data about the LDS Church in particular.

In this post, I’ve gathered Google Trends data on a bunch of different churches and I’ll show daily 2019 vs. 2020 comparisons for each one. I’m only making comparisons to Christian churches, and my list is pretty US-centric, both because I went with what I was most familiar with. Here’s the complete list, along with what Google Trends categorizes each as. Note that I went with what looked like a high-volume search term for each church or denomination, so for example for Methodists I chose the United Methodist Church, but for Baptists, which represents lots of different churches, even the biggest organizations (e.g., Southern Baptist Convention) had far lower volume, so I just went with “Baptists.” In addition to traditional denominations and fringe groups like us and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, I included a couple of big megachurches because I understand they’ve been growing a lot relative to the old mainline denominations. I’ve ordered them as fringe groups first, followed by mainstream ones sort of from high (more ritual) to low (less ritual) (based on nothing more than my sense of them), with the megachurches at the end.

Church or belief (Google trends suggested term) Google trends category
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Church
Jehovah’s Witnesses Denomination
Seventh-Day Adventist Church Denomination
Catholic Church Church
Eastern Orthodox Church Church
Episcopal Church United States (I guess to differentiate from Anglican churches in other countries?)
Lutheranism Church
Presbyterianism Church
United Methodist Church Denomination
Baptists Church
African Methodist Episcopal Church
Pentecostalism Following
Lakewood Church Church in Houston, Texas
Saddleback Church Topic

As commenters on my first post pointed out, in the particular case of the LDS Church, there are reasons to doubt that this is that good a measure of interest in the Church. And what I found in my second post supported that, with far different results for a search term used by members of the Church versus by non-members. Given that difference, with all these other churches that I’m far less familiar with, who even knows what other complications I’m overlooking? There are probably a lot, but I think the data are fun to look at anyway if you just keep your truckload of salt handy.

Also, while I’m bringing up reasons to be leery of the Google Trends data, let me show you something about their scaling that makes me a little crazy. I noticed when I accidentally moved the end date of a time series one day forward or back that it changed the whole rest of the series, rather than just omitting the day in question. This suggests to me that the scaling to 100 that the help mentions isn’t all that Google Trends is doing. Rather, it’s aggregating a bunch of data and probably smoothing it together with some kind of model under the hood.

Here, let me show you what I’m talking about. The graph shows daily results for worldwide searches for “Mormon” from April 1 of this year through different ending days.

Read More

Change in interest in church during the pandemic part II: Members vs. non-members

I posted a few days ago about change in interest in church (in the LDS Church in particular) during the coronavirus. I used Google Trends data on searches for the Church. Commenters on the post (and on Facebook) made some excellent points about how differences might be attributable to change in interest from Mormons versus from non-Mormons. In this post, I’m going to make a quick attempt to tease that apart. (Commenters also raised other good critiques, such as that a change in Google Trends data might not reflect a difference in organic interest so much as a structural change in how church is happening during the pandemic, that are beyond the scope of what I will look at in this post.)

My approach is simple. Rather than looking at Google Trends data for just the Church itself, I’ll look at data for two different Mormon-related terms, one that’s more often used by Mormons, and one that’s more often used by non-Mormons. For the term more often used by Mormons, I chose “Come Follow Me,” an excellent suggestion Ardis made on my last post. Given that it’s a pretty well-known statement Jesus made in the New Testament, I wouldn’t have guessed how much its usage would be dominated by Mormons, but it clearly is. Looking at the Google Trends data, here are reasons I think it’s mostly being searched by Mormons:

  • Search volume is the highest for the US, and within the US, for Utah, followed by Idaho.
  • There are weekly Sunday peaks that disappear on Conference weekend.
  • The top five associated search terms Google Trends suggests are all Mormon related.

For the term more often used by non-Mormons, I’m using “Mormon,” which is ideal because President Nelson’s campaign to get us to stop saying it is clearly having an effect on people in the Church, but, not surprisingly, hasn’t been so quickly heeded by people outside the Church. As with “Come Follow Me,” the data looks consistent with the expectation of who’s using it, as the peaks are for Mormon-related news stories rather than for General Conference, when searches for the Church peak.

This graph shows daily results for “Come Follow Me” since the beginning of 2019.

Read More

Change in interest in church during the pandemic

I’ve seen the possibility floated in a number of places (e.g., in this W&T post) that when the Church resumes regular Sunday meetings, fewer people will go back than were attending regularly before the pandemic. I can certainly see the argument for this. It’s much easier to continuously keep up with a practice like weekly church attendance than to stop and start, particularly if there were already barriers making attendance difficult (distance, hearing offensive things, etc.).

I was wondering if there’s any way to forecast the degree to which this might happen by looking at what people are doing now, while not attending church. Of course this is an extremely difficult thing to measure. Not even individual wards, which typically have at least some sense of activity level from sacrament meeting attendance if nothing else, likely have much idea of what’s going on. But Google does. Google Trends tracks what people are searching for online. While this is obviously far from a perfect measure of how engage people still are with church while not attending, it might give us at least a little insight.

There are a few important things to know about Google Trends data:

  • You can get results by countries, states/provinces, and even metro areas. I wasn’t interested in geographic differences here, so everything I’ll show comes from worldwide results.
  • It doesn’t give absolute numbers–like the number of people who searched for something–but rather relative search numbers, comparing across search terms or across time for a single search term. It always gives results normed so the highest value is 100.
  • It lets you search for words (literal searches people have performed) or topics, where related searches about the same thing are aggregated. I chose to search for the topic “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” because I suspect Google is smart enough to aggregate searches like “Mormon church” and “LDS church,” and also because their help says that topics aggregate across languages. I also tried a few other LDS topics, but they gave a far smaller search volume, so for this analysis, I just stuck to that single topic.
  • You can get results back to 2004 and up to a few days ago. The granularity of the data you get depends on how long a time frame you ask for. If it’s short enough, you get daily data. If it’s longer, you get weekly or monthly. I wanted daily data from January 2019. This is a long enough period that if I asked for it all at once, I got weekly data. My solution was to ask for daily data in a series of three-month periods. Unfortunately, this means that each query for a three-month period was normed to a different maximum value. In order to make the results from the different three-month periods comparable, I set them to overlap a little. By doing this, I got two results for the days that appeared in both periods, and I could use the ratio between the values given for those days in the two periods to re-norm one period so that it was comparable to the other. I used a series of re-norming steps like this to stitch together the entire daily series from January 2019 to May 2020.

The graph below shows relative search volume for the Church for the entire period.

There are two extremely clear patterns: First, there are big spikes at General Conference time. Second, there are weekly spikes every Sunday. Both of these are probably unsurprising.

Read More

Explanation of the Church’s New Logo

Although President Nelson discussed the Church’s new logo when he introduced it in General Conference, the Church, in consultation with McNaughton Fine Art, realized that what was also needed was a straightforward explanation of the deep symbolism of the logo, as was provided for the new Tabernacle Choir logo. We here at ZD are pleased to share this exclusive leaked draft of the document.

Conference Review, April 2020

Best story: It was very simple, but I enjoyed President Eyring’s story about hearing Elder Haight pray and thinking he sounded like he was smiling while he did.

Worst story, God plays favorites category: I wasn’t a fan of Elder Andersen’s story of the stake patriarch who Russell M. Nelson performed a miraculous heart surgery on. I felt like by mentioning his calling, Elder Andersen was suggesting that God of course intervened specially for this man, even when of course many other people die of heart problems all the time and don’t get miraculously healed.

Worst story, prosperity gospel category: Elder Clayton’s story of going to Paraguay during a financial crisis was horrifying. He explained how, in a meeting with stake presidents, he was overwhelmed when hearing about so many people’s problems, so he asked the stake presidents to tell him how many Church members who were paying tithing and fast offerings and doing their callings had problems, and the stake presidents said none of them. Elder Clayton was clearly relieved that he could dismiss all the problems of people he had carefully categorized as marginal Church members. I think Elder Clayton needs to learn about selection effects. Of course the people who were paying tithing and fast offerings weren’t having financial trouble. They were still able to pay! It’s not a question of righteous people paying tithing; it’s a question of better-off people paying tithing and then being classified as righteous. It was also appalling that he was so open about asking the stake presidents to tell him a different thing so that he wouldn’t have to deal with the discomfort of hearing about people’s problems.

Best quote: Elder Giménez, quoting the third verse of “Be Still My Soul”:

Be still, my soul: The hour is hast’ning on
When we shall be forever with the Lord,
When disappointment, grief, and fear are gone,
Sorrow forgot, love’s purest joys restored.
Be still, my soul: When change and tears are past,
All safe and blessed we shall meet at last.

Worst quote: Elder Bednar, quoting Ezra Taft Benson’s quote where he explains that there are no systematic social problems, only righteous people who pull themselves up by their bootstraps and wicked people who don’t:

The Lord works from the inside out. The world works from the outside in. The world would take people out of the slums. Christ takes the slums out of people, and then they take themselves out of the slums. The world would mold men by changing their environment. Christ changes men, who then change their environment. The world would shape human behavior, but Christ can change human nature.

Best visual aid: I really liked this picture Elder Stevenson showed of a bunch of granite blocks waiting to be used in the construction of the Salt Lake Temple.

Worst visual aid: President Bingham’s picture of the couple that races tandem bikes where of course the husband is in front and the wife is in back. (In case you missed it, you might enjoy Pandora’s response to the tandem bicycle analogy to marriage.)

Read More

A Temple-Announcing Spree

President Nelson announced eight new temples in General Conference on Sunday. This keeps up his pace from last year, when he announced 16 new temples across the two Conferences. Actual construction of all these new temples hasn’t kept up, though. Ground was broken for 11 new temples in 2019, but none have been started this year. This is why President Nelson’s spree seems to me to be more one of temple announcing than temple building. In any case, thinking about this gap between announced temples and built temples motivated me to look back at the data on the Church’s pace of the announcing, beginning construction on, and dedicating temples across the past few decades.

The graph below shows the year-by-year count of how many temples were announced, had construction begin, and were dedicated each year since 1950. I took the data from the list of temples on the Church website, and from Wikipedia where the information wasn’t available on the Church website because a temple is not yet dedicated or is being renovated.

Read More

Hymns for a Time of Coronavirus

Come, Come, Ye Saints

Photo by KIM DAE JEUNG from Pexels.

Come, come, ye Saints
No quarantining fear
But with joy
Keep away!
Though hard to you
May distancing appear
Let’s stay home
Day by day!
‘Tis better if we need to meet
To keep a distance of six feet!
Do this and joy, the virus quelled
All is well! All is well!

Now Let Us Be Home

Now let us be home in extended staycation.
For safety as strangers on earth let us stay.
Sad tidings of virus have come to each nation,
But soon blessed hour of containment, we pray!
When from all the people COVID will be driven,
And none will infect them from morn until ev’n,
And all shall come forth and embrace one another
The WHO and CDC will free all to come play!

(Thanks to Olea of the Exponent who suggested a nice edit that fixed the rhythm of the sixth line of “Come, Come, Ye Saints.”)

How General Conference Will Change when Nobody Attends

The Church announced today that the April General Conference will be held in the Conference Center, but that to limit the spread of COVID-19, the public will not be admitted. Only “general authorities, general officers and their spouses, musicians, choirs, technicians, and others” who are participating will be allowed in. I applaud this move. It’s great to see the Church being proactive in helping to limit this disease that WHO just officially labeled a pandemic.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

 

I’m wondering, though, how having no audience (or a very small one made up only of spouses of participants) will change Conference. I’ve never been to Conference in person, so I’m just going to be making some guesses, and I look forward to you sharing your thoughts in the comments.

Will they still have sustaings of General Authorities and General Officers?

Read More

Different Way the Handbook Says “Don’t”

I’ve noticed that there are a number of different wordings used in the Church Handbook to say not to do something. Of course, these differences long predate the new Handbook released this week. It was just the release of the new Handbook that got me to thinking about it now.

Here are seven different wordings I’ve seen in the handbook for saying “don’t.” (I’m sure this list is not exhaustive. These are just the ones I found from a quick look at a few sections.)

Photo by Kyle Glenn on Unsplash
  • Members don’t do X.
  • The Church/Church leaders does/do not encourage X.
  • The Church/Church leaders counsel against doing X.
  • The Church/Church leaders strongly discourage doing X.
  • Members should not do X.
  • Members must not do X.
  • Doing X is prohibited/not authorized.

Read More

Rejected Names for Church Wi-Fi Networks

It appears that the Church will be changing the name of the Wi-Fi networks in meetinghouses from “LDSAccess” to “Liahona.” I assume this is part of President Nelson’s push to not use abbreviations for the name of the Church. Would it be too impertinent of me to point out that “Liahona” doesn’t contain Jesus’s name either?

In any case, I’m sure that the powers that be considered many possible names before settling on the one they chose. Here are some of my guesses for what some of their rejected candidates might have been.

Image credit: Vectors by Vecteezy

LSD Access
No Doubter Router
Broad and Spacious Band
Strait and Narrow Band
Sweet Is the Network
The Promised LAN
WiFi #19
How Firmware a Foundation
In the Internet but not of the Internet
Holy Text Temple Protocol
Moroni’s Mesh
Helaman’s Hub
Router of Riplakish
Pillar of Firewall
Modest Is Hottest Spot
Wireless Local Area Network of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
SCMC Surveillance Van

If you have additions to the list, please don’t hesitate to share them in the comments!

Nacle Notebook 2019: Funniest Comments

This post is my annual compilation of the funniest comments and bits of posts that I read on the Bloggernacle in the past year. In case you haven’t read them yet, here are links to compilations for previous years: 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008.

Most of these are excerpts from longer comments or posts. I’ve made each person’s name a link to the original source, so you can go and read them in their original context if you want. Also, the comments are in roughly chronological order.

Comments on Sam Brunson’s post “Call for guest posts: #TeachingPrimaryCFM” at BCC:

[responding to the suggestion that a child could only sit still for as many minutes as they were old]

Great suggestion. I’ll be 72 this year and not old enough for 2-hour church.

I taught the Valiant 9 class last year . . . . [at] the monthly teacher council, . . . . we all came in there with different challenges. The gospel doctrine teachers are asking themselves, How can I make this new and interesting to people who have heard it so many times before? The youth teachers are asking, How can I get my kids to see that this really does apply to them? And the primary teacher is asking, How can I get my students to sit at the table instead of under the table?

I was teaching 8 yr olds . . . about the miraculous occurrences at the Kirtland Temple dedication. I was using all of my story telling skills in hopes of providing a relatable experience for about ten. After telling the kids about some at the dedication speaking in toungues, the appearance of an angel, and the visions and miracles that occurred, the kids were quiet, still, and ostensibly attentive. I thought I had ‘em. Then one boy raised his hand. I knew him to be a smart kid. I expected him to ask who the angel was. When I called on him, he very matter of factly asked, “Brother G, did you know I’m going to Disneyland next week?”

Read More

New Church Policies for a New Year

Some of my sisters visited me over the holidays, and together we came up with a list of goofy Church policy pronouncements that we’d like to hear this year.

Twinkies are permitted for use in the sacrament (see D&C 27:2), but only if it is preceded by a disclaimer that their use does not imply any endorsement of the Church or its priesthood by the Hostess Corporation.

The Church wishes to state clearly so there can be no confusion that it has no connection with the dating app Moroni’s Bosom.

Read More

Christmas Carol Confusion

When I was a kid, I was deeply confused by the lyrics of some of the Christmas carols that I heard or even sang. For example, in the chorus of “What Child Is This?”, this line got me stuck:

Haste, haste, to bring Him laud

Laud? What the heck is laud? I remember wondering if it was a long-ago time, and since food wasn’t as abundant as it is now, maybe what Baby Jesus needed to have brought to him was lard. Not that tasty, but it would keep him and his family alive for a while. Also, I reasoned, perhaps people were just singing the word with some kind of weird affected accent.

Another song that caused me confusion was “The First Noel.” This line in particular:

Was to certain poor shepherds in fields as they lay

For the longest time, I thought that the word certain here was a verb, and this was some as-yet-unknown-to-me usage that meant “to make more certain.” So the angel appeared to the shepherds, who were in doubt and fear, and the angel reassured them to make them certain that all would be well. I admit that I’m still kind of disappointed at its actual meaning, where it feels like a filler word. Like, was it really important at all which shepherds heard the news of Jesus’s birth? Not really. It could have been any old shepherds. Or people of any occupation, really. The important point is just that the birth was announced. It’s not like they were the certain Wise Men who came from the east or anything. So it wasn’t really certain poor shepherds. It would work just as well to say random poor shepherds. I still like my childhood interpretation better. I imagine that we all like shepherds have need of being made more certain, and an angel comes down and provides that certainty.

Photo by Filip Mroz on Unsplash

Read More

What to do with the earnings on $100 billion

So, it appears that the Church may have an even bigger stack of investments than many of us thought. In this post, I’m not interested in the possible tax law issues of this giant fund, but rather just the size of the fund. To be blunt, I find it appalling that the Church has this much money available at the same time that General Authorities continuously harp on members to pay tithing, not to mention that they pass other costs on to members like the recently-announced increase in the cost of serving as a missionary and the ongoing requirement for members to clean church buildings.

I was so irritated by this revelation that I started going back through Conference talks and Ensign articles to try to make a comprehensive list of all the times GAs have told stories of members valiantly paying tithing instead of paying for food or rent. But I got sidetracked by a really interesting talk that President Monson gave in 1990 where he discussed changes the Church had made over time to reduce the financial burden on members. He said,

The newly announced local unit budget allowance program is but one of several carefully studied and prayerfully implemented steps taken by the Church to relieve the membership of financial burdens which some simply could not carry.

He then went on to list four changes made in the previous years that were designed to reduce the financial burden of Church membership on members:

  • The consolidated meeting schedule was introduced (I assume reducing transportation costs).
  • The Church went from paying 50% of the cost of new buildings to 60%, 70%, 96%, and finally 100%
  • The per-capita welfare assessment was eliminated.
  • Ward/branch budgets became completely funded by the Church.
Photo by Sharon McCutcheon on Unsplash

Read More

Who bears their testimony in F&T meeting?

Who bears their testimony in fast and testimony meeting? I’m interested in this question not so much in the sense of which particular people do (“Oh, no, it’s Brother Mansplainer!”), but in the sense of whether it’s the same ten people every month or an ever-changing group.

To get some data on this question, I noted who in my ward bore their testimony in each of the 12 fast and testimony meetings in 2019. Of course it would be much better to have data from hundreds or thousands of wards and branches in different locations, but that would be really hard to get, so I decided to start with what I have. Unfortunately, I accidentally deleted data for one month when I got a new phone and factory reset the old one, so what I’m working with is 11 months of data. I excluded the testimony that’s always borne by the bishopric member who’s conducting the meeting, as I was interested in tracking testimonies borne by people who chose to do it, and bishopric members are pretty much expected to do it as a matter of course.

In the 11 F&T meetings, 99 testimonies were borne, or an average of 9 per meeting. These 99 testimonies were borne by just 44 people, so the average person who bore their testimony bore it 2.25 times in the year. The maximum number of testimonies borne by any one person was 9, and this was achieved by two people, so together they accounted for over 18% of all testimonies borne. Of the 99 testimonies, four came from visitors and two from missionaries serving in the ward.

Before I get more into the question of the same ten people, I thought it might be interesting to look at a breakdown of the testimonies by age and gender, which is shown in this graph.

Most of the testimonies (82%) were borne by adults, with some teens (age 12-17) and only one child (age < 12). Women and girls bore more testimonies in all age groups (58% of adults, 76% of teens, 100% of children).

Read More

Conference Review, October 2019

This post has some of my favorite and least-favorite things from this last General Conference. I’m sorry it has been a few weeks so it might be largely forgotten. Anyway, please share your favorites and least favorites in the comments if you’d like.

Best story: Elder Alliaud’s story of his non-member mother quizzing him when he decided to get baptized, including asking him, “Do you have any idea how long church is?”
Worst story, hedge about the law category: Elder Christofferson’s story of the paralyzed patriarch where he carefully made it clear that it was a priesthood holder and not some unwashed heathen (or worse yet, woman), who supported the patriarch’s hands when he gave blessings.
Worst story, endlessly serving woman category: Elder Christofferson again, although this time sharing a story he heard from Elder Bednar and his wife about a very recently widowed woman who of course still served as an usher at a temple dedication, thus helpfully normalizing the idea that women should be forever serving and never thinking of themselves.

Photo by Joshua Hoehne on Unsplash

Best visual aid: The Del Parson painting of a smiling, welcoming Jesus included by President Aburto in her talk “Thru Cloud and Sunshine, Lord, Abide with Me!”
Worst visual aid: The picture of a (to me) comically distressed-looking Moses included by Elder Stevenson near the end of his talk “Deceive Me Not”
Worst visual aid, missing category: Elder Uchtdorf made mention of Hobbits throughout his talk, but didn’t show us a picture of even one Hobbit!

Best laughs: Elder Holland’s report of the little boy who laid on the floor and raised his foot during the sustainings last General Conference;  Elder Gong’s story of the longsuffering Primary teacher who didn’t interrupt the child who prayed and expressed gratitude for each letter and number.
Worst laugh: President Oaks making light of a woman’s concern over whether she would have to share a house with a sister wife in the next life.

Read More

Some Thoughts on the Changes in One of the Temple Recommend Interview Questions

President Nelson introduced an updated set of temple recommend questions in Conference on Sunday. The change that stood out to me the most was the revision to the question about affiliation with apostate groups. Here’s the old version of the question:

Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

And here’s the new version:

Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

(I’ve taken the wording for both from WVS’s handy side-by-side comparison at BCC.)

The old version of this question has been the subject of lots of discussion on the Bloggernacle, particularly when a dissenting group (e.g., Ordain Women) has been in the news. It appears that the original version of this question was aimed at members of polygamous groups who wanted to have access to LDS temples, and much of the discussion has focused on whether the question is still about polygamous groups, or whether it includes all kinds of groups that might oppose Church teachings.

Image source: Vectors by Vecteezy

Read More

The Selfish Gene (-ral Authority)

How often do General Authorities call their relatives to also be General Authorities? A friend asked me this question, and I thought it might be an interesting one to look at. Off the top of my head, I thought the answer would be that this happens a lot. For example, I remember President Hinckley protesting that he had nothing to do with the calling of his son as a Seventy, and I know about historical examples like Joseph and Hyrum Smith, Parley and Orson Pratt, and Bruce R. McConkie being Joseph Fielding Smith’s son-in-law.

To make the question more manageable, I decided to look only at members of the Quorum of the Twelve rather than all GAs. This includes nearly all First Presidency members too because I looked at data at the person level (meaning that each Q12 member was counted only once, versus for example looking at the composition of the Q12 each year or something like that) and nearly all FP members were also Q12 members at one point.

The first analysis I did was kind of a quick-and-dirty approach that I think is nevertheless kind of fun. I listed the last names of all Q12 members, and then checked whether each, at the time of his call, brought a new last name to the Quorum. For example, two Johnson and two Pratts were called in the original Q12, so among the four of them, they brought only two unique last names. In this analysis, I counted Smith as being a duplicate the first time it was used, given that Joseph Smith was the head of the Church, even though he wasn’t a member of the Q12.

The graph below shows, across time, the cumulative count of number of Q12 members called (blue line), and the cumulative count of unique last names for those Q12 members (red line). If every single Q12 member had a unique last name, the two lines would be on top of each other. They separate to the degree that new Q12 members have last names that duplicate last names of previous Q12 members. Note that on the horizontal axis, I separated 1835 out as its own bin, because that’s the year the original Q12 were called. After that, I grouped years into 15-year bins, which I know is a little odd, but the calling of new Q12 members is such an infrequent event that when I used 10-year bins, there were several decades with few to no new calls.


Read More