Your Family Tree's Church Activity?

[NeedleinA]

So this is something I've tossed around in my mind from time to time. This is a snap shot (right now) of my family tree from my grandparents down to their great grand children. This shows current activity level in the church. Green = Active. Yellow = Semi-Active. Red = Inactive

So what does your family tree look like?

Same kind of ratios/percentages?

See any trends in activity vs. off spring?

Other trends?

How do you differ?

p.s. I'm the one with the star

[classylady]

Very interesting.  And, the same would hold true for my family.  In my family, if the parents were inactive almost all of the children were also inactive.  And, even if they had their own children baptized into the church, the next generation didn't.  The following generation doesn't consider themselves LDS at all, while their parents, even if inactive, did acknowledge the church, even though inactive. 

[NeedleinA]

11 minutes ago, classylady said:

The following generation doesn't consider themselves LDS at all, 

This is what I am already seeing in some of them now. 

I'll also note that in the RED members, they are all marrying age, half are simply just choosing not to. 

[Sunday21]

Only greeny in a seas of atheists!

[NeedleinA]

18 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

Only greeny in a seas of atheists!

And that is okay! We are happy to have a mighty green Sunday21! Your green simply means you might fit into the top of the Family Tree waiting for your generations of green to follow

[Vort]

Grandparents: Both sets were active by the standards of their day.

Parents' generation: On my Mom's side, two or perhaps three siblings were/are active, one or two are semiactive, and one is inactive. On my Dad's side, one brother left the Church, one sister was inactive or nominally active, and I believe the rest were active. Only three still survive, and I believe all are active.

My generation (siblings and cousins): One brother has left the Church in all but the records; the rest of us siblings are at least nominally active. Of my enate (mother's side) cousins: Each famliy (aunt and uncle) has at least two children who would be considered active. Several cousins are nominally active but in reality are not really converted and are in that danger zone of complaining about the Church and showing their friends how enlightened they really are in supporting current social trends such as homosexuality normalization. Several have completely left the Church, at least in effect and in a few cases in actual fact. Of my agnate (father's side) cousins, some have completely left the Church, some are marginal, and quite a few are strong and committed.

Next generation (children, nieces, and nephews): So far, my own children are active and committed, and I have no reason to believe they will choose otherwise any time in the near future. Ditto with one sister's children. The one who has left the Church has no children. Of the others, each has one child still active, the other or others having gone inactive or totally disclaiming the Church. Heartbreaking, really. My cousins' children seem to be running the same gamut -- though there is a very pronounced tendency for faithful cousins to have faithful children and cousins weaker in the faith to have children uninterested in religious observance.

The more generations go by, the more loved ones we appear to be losing. I say "appear" because I can't see into the hearts of ancestors or my own living relatives; it's all I can do to track my own beliefs and motivations and those of my children.

[Guest]

Both sets of grandparents and all their children are active.... Catholics.

All their grandchildren (my generation) are also active... mostly Catholics with 1 LDS and 2 Born Again Christians.

Great grandchildren (my kids' generation) are also active... the Catholics all have active Catholic kids, the Born Again have active Born Again kids, the LDS have active LDS kids.

But then... I call active Catholic those that do nothing else but to try to attend the 1-hour Mass on Sundays.

[NeedleinA]

Thank you Vort and Anatess for sharing your thoughts! As I look at the diagram I just made last night and read over everyone else's family trees it makes me think about two things:

1. A perfect parent, our Father in Heaven, despite his efforts, unfortunately still had issues with "a third part of the host of heaven". What "a third part" actually means, I don't know? 1/3 or 33.3333%? Or of 3 groups/parts of his children the 3rd group/part was lost and the number contained therein is really unknown? I've heard it discussed both ways and I really don't know the correct answer. Either way, even despite our best efforts, we may still lose some of our children to inactivity for "a season" or for good.

2. Lastly. There is an obscure quote that I read several years ago by Joseph Smith.

"Lillie Freeze

We should post ourselves regarding the prophecies that have been predicted. I will mention one in particular that was uttered by the Prophet Joseph Smith, he said the time would come when none but the women of the Latter-day Saints would be willing to bear children.

Lillie Freeze, “Remarks at the Y. L. M. I. Conference of Box Elder Stake,” Young Woman’s Journal2, no. 2 (November 1890): 81."

It makes me wonder how this prophecy would actually take place? Is it even still in force? What events/causes would lead to this? As I look at my grandparents family tree, I can see what one might see as the start of it, as those inactive members are far too worried about "self" let alone getting married, or having children. Any thoughts?

Edited February 15, 2016 by NeedleinA

[David13]

You people really make me feel left out.

In my tree, church activity, in this church    ...   zero.  0.  None.  Nothing. 

dc

[NeedleinA]

David13. Out of curiosity, does this mean you are lone member, or does it mean they once were active and now are no longer. Thanks!

[mirkwood]

My wife and kids and I are active.  I come from a part member and heavily inactive family.  Mom was an active member. Dad is a non member and so is his entire family.  Mom's parents and sister inactive.  Everyone else married non members.    Mom remarried an active member and was married in the temple.

[NeedleinA]

51 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

My wife and kids and I are active.  

Hooray, thumbs up to you and your family Mirkwood!

[David13]

1 hour ago, NeedleinA said:

David13. Out of curiosity, does this mean you are lone member, or does it mean they once were active and now are no longer. Thanks!

I'm the lone member of anyone ever even remotely related to me, that I know of.

I was divorced and my ex passed away, I haven't remarried, my parents and all others are dead or far away.  I only joined the church last year.

I have been aware of the church since 1963 on a visit to Salt Lake.  My mother was a MTChoir fan. 

I was raised as a catholic but was inactive all my adult life.

I am being called to Utah and was called into the church.  I guess it was an answer to a prayer to find a way to better prepare for the final day of mortal life.

So far it's all working great.

dc

[NeedleinA]

15 minutes ago, David13 said:

I'm the lone member of anyone ever even remotely related to me, that I know of.

So far it's all working great.

I say the same thing I said to Sunday21, we are glad you are here and happy to have you as a shining bright green! This is a great place to fellowship and remind ourselves that we are not alone. Glad things are working great for you! I hope you enjoy Utah and find fellowship there too. Going with realistic expectations is key I think.

[Guest]

On my side:

My parents were converts.  They baptized his parents.  Her parents wanted to no part of it but weren't against my parents joining.

One has left the Church (don't know if he ever made it official). Another is inactive (as are her children). The rest are active.  I don't know of my nieces and nephews on that side.

On her side:

On both Mrs. Carb's mother's and father's side goes back to pioneer days.

Of her maternal grandparents, most of the children are still active.  But the grandchildren are largely inactive.

Of her paternal granparents, most of the children are still active.  I don't know about the grand children.

On her parents side, all are active, though one has declared he wants to leave the Church. He stays because he finds that it is a good place to raise a family.  There are only a few adult grandchildren.  Two are on missions.  Actually, the next two oldest may not be 18 yet.  But so far all have very good testimonies, faith, and gospel knowledge (considering their age).  I personally believe that some ancestor was given a promise that the family line would remain faithful.  And as many as fall away, some are staying true in every generation.

[NeedleinA]

16 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Of her maternal grandparents, most of the children are still active.  But the grandchildren are largely inactive.

Any thoughts as to why you think the dramatic shift of active parents and largely inactive children has happened?

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Well, only dealing with my mom's side of the family....I come from a long line of pioneers...some of whom knew Joseph Smilth.  

My grandmother was a member, and her first husband was a member (killed in WWII), her second husband wasn't a member, but he was a very good man.  My grandmother was less active for decades (she wouldn't tell me why, I did ask.  )  But she returned to full activity in the church and received her endowments when she was in her 80's.

Of her five children only one is active in the church.  He served as a Bishop.  I don't know about his children (we are not a close family.)

My mom stopped attending church in her teenage years.  She always told me that if she did go to church she would go to the LDS church, but she never returned to church.  I joined the church on my own at 12.  One of my sisters is a member (she joined as an adult, but is less active now).  My brothers are non-members.

My husband and I are very active, my oldest son just returned from a mission, and my second son is serving...we'll likely have another missionary by the end of 2017.  

 

[Guest]

8 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

Any thoughts as to why you think the dramatic shift of active parents and largely inactive children has happened?

I know exactly why.  But that will take us into a thread jack that I am just not in the mood for right now.

[mordorbund]

From last year's pew poll.

 

2/3 retention is the general trend across the US for LDS families.

• 

 

You mention a trend away from marriage - this is the case across the US. And although we lead the way in a culture of marriage, we aren't doing as well as we were 7 years ago.

• 

 

And since you mention birth rates, I'll toss this one into the mix as well:

• 

Edited February 16, 2016 by mordorbund

[NeedleinA]

26 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

2/3 retention is the general trend across the US for LDS families.

You mention a trend away from marriage - this is the case across the US. And although we lead the way in a culture of marriage, we aren't doing as well as we were 7 years ago.

And since you mention birth rates, I'll toss this one into the mix as well:

Thank you for sharing Mordorbund!

1/3 of the members not retained... hum, why does that figure should familiar??

This is where I wish we had identical access to data going back to the beginning of the restoration. Well, it is not perfect, but #1 in Marriage and Babies counts for something.

[David13]

18 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

I say the same thing I said to Sunday21, we are glad you are here and happy to have you as a shining bright green! This is a great place to fellowship and remind ourselves that we are not alone. Glad things are working great for you! I hope you enjoy Utah and find fellowship there too. Going with realistic expectations is key I think.

I have totally unreasonable expectations about Utah.  That's what makes it so much fun every time I'm there. 

I'll be back again next month, and then also for General Conference.

dc

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

Thank you for sharing Mordorbund!

1/3 of the members not retained... hum, why does that figure should familiar??

This is where I wish we had identical access to data going back to the beginning of the restoration. Well, it is not perfect, but #1 in Marriage and Babies counts for something.

I hadn't thought of that.

My parents: 1/3 of their kids are gone (one gay, unmarried.  One inactive, divorced from non-member husband, married to another non-member husband). 1/4 of their grandkids.  (Close for a single point statistic).  Just a few grandkids married.  Motley of stories of divorce, members, non-member spouses, active, inactive etc.  I could certainly see this degrading to the 1/3 number you're focusing on.

Wife's parents: 1/7 children inactive.  And we believe there is hope for him.  All but one spouse is active.  We don't really have much hope for her.  So far, so good on the grandkids (how many? 36?)

Wife's maternal grandparents - as best as I know: Children 4/5 active. Several spouses are inactive or non-members.  Grandchildren -- I'm guessing about 50%.

All told it really is close to 1/3.  Interesting.  But the inactivity rate is reported as around 50% isn't it?

Edited February 16, 2016 by Guest

[Guest Godless]

On 2/15/2016 at 7:38 PM, Sunday21 said:

Only greeny in a seas of atheists!

I'm the opposite, the only atheist in a family of active members. To be fair though, LDS membership doesn't extend beyond my immediate family since my parents are both converts.

[NeuroTypical]

My non-LDS half-sister does geneology, and prides herself at finding all 3-400 descendants of John Typical who came to the US from England.  She notes a strange trend - the Typical bloodline has a streak of insanity, and a streak of Mormons.  About one for every 30-40 relatives.  

I figure I'm both.

[zil]

8 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

...the Typical bloodline has a streak of insanity, and a streak of Mormons.  About one for every 30-40 relatives.  

I figure I'm both.

So you're an insane, streaking Mormon?