Here’s a story at the SL Trib: “Despite remarkable growth, the big question remains: Will converts become LDS lifers?” I can’t access the story (behind the subscription paywall) so I’m just going to take their prompt and run with it. I’ll write my own article. Will converts become LDS lifers? If you have access to the SL Trib article, you are welcome to post a summary or excerpt a paragraph.
First question: Are Converts any different, as LDS members, than Lifers? Certainly for the first year or so, a Convert is just learning their way around. Some of that is picking up points of LDS doctrine they didn’t get from the missionaries, and honestly I have no idea how much doctrine is still included in current missionary discussions. (Do missionaries even have set discussions they are primed to present when the opportunity arises?) But a lot of what you might call Convert Orientation Year is learning Mormon Culture, from what you can wear or not wear to church to what you can or should do or not do on Sunday to goshdarnit what substitute swear words Mormons use.
My experience as a teenage convert is you are very conscious of being a convert for the first few years. And then somewhere down the line after five or six years that fades away and you feel like any other Mormon most of the time. My sense is there isn’t any difference between a forty-something Mormon who converted as a youth or young adult and a forty-something Mormon who grew up in the Church.
Second question: Do Lifers view Converts differently? Good question. Like I said, after a few years a convert is fully integrated into LDS activity and culture, but LDS lifers may not view them as equals. I think some LDS lifers think converts are not fully and truly Mormon, as if not going through LDS Primary or Seminary leaves a permanent lack of something in the convert’s knowledge of or commitment to the Church. Similarly, I suspect some LDS lifers think an LDS convert is more likely to lose a testimony or leave the LDS Church than a Lifer. Lifer parents might be nervous about one of their kids marrying a Convert. I need some Lifers to weigh in on this.
Third question: Do Converts view Lifers differently? Maybe. The fact is that if you are an adult convert or maybe an older teenage convert, you made a choice to join the LDS Church. Lifers just grew up in the Church — they were socialized (programmed?) to be good Mormons. Statistics show that most people who are in a particular denomination grew up in that denomination. So some Converts may think Converts made the choice, sometimes a difficult one, to join the LDS Church, whereas Lifers are only LDS because they just happened to be born into an LDS home. Lifers just kind of go with the flow, while Converts boldly pursue a chosen path.
So do LDS lifers feel like they ever made a choice to be LDS? That could be in the ongoing sense of every week you make the choice to show up at church on Sunday, or it could be a striking spiritual experience or testimony moment that is the foundation of their continued activity in the Church, much like a convert often goes through.
Final question: Do converts become Ex-Mormons any differently than LDS lifers become Ex-Mormons? I have never really thought of this angle before. One item would be whether Converts are more likely than Lifers to formally exit or to do a soft exit (go totally inactive), and I’m thinking here of a Convert who is fully socialized into life as an active Mormon for several years. I’m guessing the percentages are about the same.
A second item would be whether the issues that lead a Convert to exit are any different from the issues that lead a Lifer to exit. And honestly, I don’t have any clear idea whether there is any distinction here.
A third issue is whether the post-Mormon experience of a Convert who exits the Church is any different from the post-Mormon experience of a Lifer. I think that in some cases a Convert has a pre-Mormon mode of living that he/she can sort of revert to, but hey after you’ve been a Mormon a few years I suspect the post-Mormon you is rather different from the pre-Mormon you. Hopefully a better you. Lifers who exit are entering a brave new world, but by the time they do a full exit I imagine they are excited, not anxious, about their upcoming post-Mormon life. I’m sure some Lifers are going to weigh in on this one. Some may miss the community and the potluck dinners and church basketball, others are just happy to leave meetings and tithing and coffee-less mornings behind.
Okay Lifers and Converts, share your views and experience.
Wheat & Tares 
There was plenty of good growth news — at least on its books — for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 2025:
• A record number of convert baptisms of more than 385,000.
• An overall global membership climbing ever closer to 18 million.
• At least 44 nations or territories with annual growth rates above 10%.
At the same time, the United States, the nation with the most Latter-day Saints, saw its net raw numbers decline for the first time, and children of record (infants added to the faith’s membership totals) continued to lag well below 100,000.
In these edited excerpts from a recent “Mormon Land” podcast, independent researcher Matt Martinich, who tracks church growth for the websites cumorah.com and ldschurchgrowth.blogspot.com, dissects the latest data:
This makes two years in a row with big jumps in convert baptisms. To what do you attribute that growth?
Some of it is that there are more missionaries serving, but the number of converts being baptized per missionary has increased as well. So it seems like it’s a function of both missionaries being more efficient with finding and baptizing new converts, as well as there just being more missionaries to do that.
But the number of converts per missionary is down from what it used to be, right?
Yeah, back from the 1970s to 1990s, it typically was about six to eight converts baptized per missionary. Last year, it was almost five. … But that’s quite a bit higher than what it has been recently, which has been more like about 3.4, 3.5.
What surprised you the most in the church’s 2025 statistical report?
The thing that really stands out is the number of converts being baptized, because this is really a significant jump. And if we think back to when we set the previous all-time record, that was in 1990. And back then the standards for converts being baptized were not as stringent as they are today.
Although much of the big growth came in Africa, the Philippines and parts of Latin America, regions across the world had spots with substantial increases. What does that say about the church’s overall global footprint?
That it’s expanding — and we have good data to support that in the country-by-country breakdown of membership figures for 2025. We had 44 countries and territories that had an annual membership growth rate of at least 10%. And that’s just never happened before. I mean, that is really remarkable. And if we look at the geographic spread of those countries, it’s not like these are all in Africa, where we see generally some of the most rapid growth. We’re seeing this in places like Serbia and Croatia. Of course, there are fewer than a thousand members in each of those countries, but that’s something we haven’t seen since the 1990s for a lot of these places. … Even countries like Spain had quite good membership growth last year, over 5%.
Which countries with substantial Latter-day Saint memberships stood out to you with the most noteworthy growth?
The Democratic Republic of Congo definitely stands out. This is a country that, as of the end of last year, had nearly 160,000 Latter-day Saints, and membership increased by 19.2 %. That is extremely unusual. … It is quite common for church attendance there to be higher than membership for many [congregations]. And even with the ones that don’t have those types of phenomenal activity rates, they’re still quite high, oftentimes 80% or so.
We’ve talked with a number of missionaries who’ve served in Europe or major metro areas in the United States, and they mention that a lot of the converts they see are actually immigrants from Africa. Have you noticed that?
Yeah, and that’s really been a long-term trend. … [Immigrant] groups are more receptive, and they tend to provide a lot of opportunities for missionaries to teach and baptize and establish congregations.
You note that net membership numbers fell in the U.S. for the first time. It wasn’t a lot, down 186 people, but it was the first overall decrease. What do you see as the reasons for that decline?
It’s a combination of several factors. One is that we’re having fewer and fewer children being born into the church in terms of active member families. … The number of children of record being added is stubbornly staying in the low 90,000s. … Another one is that we’re having an aging membership in the United States, or we’re having a lot more members dying due to old age. Some of it is also due to children of record who don’t get baptized and are eventually dropped from the rolls. … Some of it might be due to people who resign their membership. I don’t really have any evidence to suggest that was any higher. If anything, it was actually probably lower last year than some previous years. Another piece might be … due to immigrant members leaving the country due to the current political climate. And I think there’s good data to support that. Puerto Rico, technically part of the United States, had a huge increase of 3,500 members. … I imagine it was probably due to membership records being updated and … sent to Puerto Rico … to where the [members] actually are. … So a lot of this could be people moving to other places or countries where they’re originally from.
It makes one wonder if convert baptisms of immigrants in the United States might be affected this year.
Possibly. … In many large cities, some Spanish-speaking congregations are having over 50 convert baptisms in a single year, which is pretty remarkable. So we might not see that this year, based on some of the changes that have been going on. That’ll be interesting to see what happens.
Why is the statistic about children of record — still well below 100,000 — concerning for the church in the long term?
It’s deeply concerning because it really stresses the problems we’re seeing with establishing full-member families where we have a husband and wife with children active in the church. This indicates that it is becoming more and more of a challenge. If you think of all of this growth the church has had in the past 40, 45 years, we should be seeing many more children of record being added. It should be 400,000 or something like that. … Instead we’ve actually seen a decline over a period of time when church membership has nearly quadrupled. That really speaks to compounding inactivity and convert retention issues. It speaks to attitudes changing about children and how many children couples have. And it really shows how the church is less insulated culturally from national norms in terms of what people see about childbearing and having families.
You frequently point to the importance of congregational growth. What did the latest figures show about that?
We had a fairly good year for the number of new congregations being created, with a net increase of almost 400. It’s still lagging at a rate that’s lower than the membership growth. Congregational growth is valuable because, to operate congregations, you need to have a certain number of active members. And so that can give us insight in terms of the actual number of people going to church on Sunday.
The Democratic Republic of Congo was the leader again in that area.
The United States was number two. We had a net increase of 63 congregations. The past few years, we’ve actually had a net decrease of about a dozen or so units a year. And so this last year we had that reversed, which I thought was interesting — even though we had that little net decrease in membership. So it’s not like the church is collapsing in the United States, it’s falling apart, members are leaving in droves. That’s just not true. If that were true, we would see that reflected in consistent declines in the number of congregations.
What would you say is the overall retention rate for the church?
Probably about half of converts are retained after 12 months. That tends to be sort of the average historically. … The problem is after two years, five years, 10 years, that number goes down substantially, unfortunately. So the bigger problem is retention for the medium to long term.
What mystifies me about converts is how they can possibly sign up to the LDS religion after doing just one hour of basic research about the Church on the Internet. Note: I know there are anti-Mormon lies out there and that you can’t believe everything you read against the Church but even if only 51% of the anti info is true how could someone join? Lifers may have been programmed to avoid any alternative info and can go a lifetime without looking. But converts? I just can’t imagine any reasonable person not discovering info that tells them to run and run fast away from the COJCOLDS (again, even if only 51% of it is true).
That Janet Reiss piece indicates that Church history is a big driver (the main driver) moving members to distance themselves from the Church. So how could anyone join if that info is out there?
A few years ago, our entire stake presidency was converts who joined the church in their early 20s. I don’t think that anyone in the stake concerned themselves for a moment about that fact, except maybe to admire them for having made such a life-changing decision .
So it sounds like josh h is basically saying that converts are manifestly stupid for making the decision to join the church, if I read his comment correctly (but maybe I mis-read). I joined near the end of my last year in high school, and it was a two-year journey, and while some may think that I am stupid for my decision to get baptized, I don’t look at it that way. Nor do I think that people are stupid who leave the church. I joined far away from the center place, and we were definitely a minority religion there, and I might have had a harder time joining had I lived in Zion.
I think that converts may be viewed as second-class citizens by some lifelong Saints. It often looks like people from UT, AZ, ID, etc. living in states in the eastern US view locals with a little contempt, which they call love, but their love sometimes comes from a position of superiority and condescension. That isn’t always true, but you do sometimes see UT cliques in wards in the mission field.
I think–but have no evidence–that converts who leave the church simply leave and go elsewhere (or nowhere at all). I don’t think that they stick around to poke, attack, laugh at, mock, etc. If I leave, which I don’t intend to do, I’ll simply leave and won’t look back. That might be one difference between lifers and converts when they turn away.
I do think that we do not do a thorough enough job of teaching people their commitments before baptism. We rush baptism, in my opinion, and people don’t really know what they’re signing up for. My journey took two years, but I understood the commitments I would be making. Maybe I took too long, but of my family of eight who were baptized (I was the oldest child), seven remained in the fold, and I am glad that our missionaries didn’t leave us for failing to make adequate progress.
Well, as one of those “pioneer ancestor” people let me answer for “lifers” from that perspective. On my pedigree chart, on that last line where you have the most ancestors before that page runs out, 6 generations back, every single one of them crossed the plains in a covered wagon or handcart. So, I am one of those “heritage Mormons” who had ancestors were were besties with Joseph Smith and if you know Joseph Smith’s wives, you know my great whatever uncle, and those few Brighamites who stayed back East a few years, well a great something grandfather held the keys to the Nauvoo temple when it burned. So, y’all know who to blame for not keeping it safe. That was his job and why he was still in Nauvoo.
So, when you have been raised to be proud of your ancestors, leaving that, admitting they were wrong to fall for a con man, can be one step of hard stuff that converts or children on converts don’t have.
Another hard thing for lifers is the believing parents. Nobody wants to break mama’s heart.
But I will let others expound on those, because they did not apply to me. Even though those were not hard for me, but I do understand that they are deal breakers for others that make it so they just cannot leave. But I am not a typical heritage Mormon who was supper proud of the ancestors or had TBM parents.
First of all, my family on both sides had some grudges. They had a love hate relationship from trauma caused by the church. Between family dying on the handcart trek, frozen/amputated fingers and toes, abused by polygamy, abandoned by polygamous parents, being driven out of Utah because someone’s second husband was a nonmember from Missouri, married men being called on four year missions to the far ends of earth and other supper high costs of believing, my ancestors all had what is called a trauma bond. So, because of trauma caused by dear church, all four of my grandparents had a love/hate relationship with the church. My parents were doubters who kept doubts hidden but were only semi active and at times downright hostile to the church. Once again a love/hate relationship.
But sometimes trauma bonding is stronger than love bonding, so my heritage is a trauma bond from my ancestors. Think severe Stockholm syndrome attachment to church. So, leaving that is confusing. Think Jews who survived the Holocaust and their attachment to their religion. Their children and grandchildren carry the trauma for several generations. Yeah, those crazies in Israel right now committing genocide who can’t see they are doing exactly what was done to their grandparents That crazy is my heritage attachment to the church.
So, leaving for lifers is different in many ways. Easier in some ways and harder in some ways. I am sure other heritage Mormons have a bit of trauma bonding. My husband does, but not near as bad. And I can’t say if it is easier or harder to break that kind of bond.
And as far as looking down on converts, I was taught to actually put them above my BIC self because they were wise enough to recognize and accept the truth when it was just handed to me.
On the other hand, there is some snobbery, and this comment is triggered by Georgis’s comment. There are those “Utah Mormons” who look down on those “in the mission field”. But it is NOT their testimonies that are looked down on. They are seen as testimony pure, but culturally deficient. It is their cultural knowledge of running the church that is seen to be lacking. Boyd KPackers unwritten order of things. It boils down to them not being steeped in Utah culture, so, they couldn’t know how to run the church. It is cultural snobbism. They think Utah culture is better—especially than Southerners. Stupid hillbillies. Yeah, that kind of snobbism. I started hating that kind of Utah Mormon as kinda bigoted.
“Some may miss the community and the potluck dinners and church basketball…”
Well, and I say this sadly, it seems there isn’t much of any of this left anyway, at least where I live.
So, Lifers experience a lot of stresses from growing up in the church that adult converts perhaps do not appreciate or understand. Though they may have their own stresses.
I was pondering this again this last Sunday. A member raised in the church, returned missionary, married in the temple, served in senior ward and stake callings, shared a testimony, in the midst of a mental breakdown, about learning about masks they had been wearing, and having to learn to love themselves for who they are. This was followed, oh irony, by a Sunday school lesson, heavily weighted towards sacrifice. What is it we sacrifice today, with the top answer apparently being ourselves, allowing God to make us into something else. I did say I thought church culture tended to lean towards over valorising sacrifice and expecting unnecessary sacrifices, which I felt was ridiculous. It didn’t go down especially well, but I really felt some balance was important.
I later raised the question with my siblings whether children raised in high demand religions were more prone to burnout as adults. I don’t know if that is especially so outside Utah. We’re in the minority, we have to be an example to those around us, as well as to younger siblings. Ward members, including our parents are kept really busy with church callings, and we grow up supporting them in those callings, as well as being given callings ourselves before we’re even adults. I know I have felt really burnt out over the last few years, when I asked to be released from my then calling, and I haven’t had one since.
I never used the word “stupid”. I’m not trying to insult anyone here.
Anna, your comment on cultural snobbism is right on target. You said it better than I did.
Quote from the SLTrib article:
“
We’ve talked with a number of missionaries who’ve served in Europe or major metro areas in the United States, and they mention that a lot of the converts they see are actually immigrants from Africa. Have you noticed that?
Yeah, and that’s really been a long-term trend. … [Immigrant] groups are more receptive, and they tend to provide a lot of opportunities for missionaries to teach and baptize and establish congregations.”
(Anyone care to comment on this?)
Also noted is a decline in US children of record (less infant blessings, less child baptisms).
Anna is absolutely correct about the fact that there is more to lose for Pioneer Heritage BIC people who disaffiliate, including a huge sense of trauma and betrayal. My convert husband is PIMO, and does not feel betrayed, mainly because he was already nuanced to start with.
I actually felt there was reverse snobbism when I was active in NYC. The locals were mostly transplants rather than converts, and most had some kind of tie to Utah. That being said, whenever we’d get temple missionaries or other TB Utah Mormons, there was some subtle or not-so-subtle eye-rolling.
I did hear someone once say that they didn’t know about the anti-Utah Mormon attitude until they got back East, but it was a thing.
Having grown up in Utah, I can only say that I need to stay away in order to keep any positive thoughts about the church in general. I am less affronted by the gospel and more affronted by the actions of the church. Like really having no separation between church and state in the local governments …
Loudly, Yeah, and that seems to diminish further prospects for missionary work among the nationals (or non-immigrants).
I’ll answer the last question.
The overwhelming majority of ex-Mormons around the world are converts. Many left not long after they converted and it probably had nothing to do with history, the CES letter, or something they read online. Many probably forgot that they converted.
When we talk of ex-Mormons we’re usually talking about Lifers who left. I think it is much harder to leave the church when your family is committed to it, your spouse, your kids, and do many of your friends and friendship network are Mormon.
I’m with josh h on white middle-class college-educated American or Western European adult converts. If or when I meet them, which is quite rare, I don’t say anything other than the typical pleasantries, but in my mind my first reaction is, “why?” I meet a lot more Latino converts and they make more sense to me. A lot of them were religious to begin with, or at least have high esteem and respect for organized religion. They are often seeking a reliable social network and often less educated. Plus, even if they speak English, they’re usually more comfortable reading and listening to Spanish-language media and wouldn’t have exposure to narratives that are critical of Mormonism, at least not in the caliber of what we have available in English. And many of the Latino converts are here today and gone tomorrow.
Depending on when the convert joins, yes, I think there are differences between converts and lifers. I think those differences are about the same order of magnitude as the difference between lifers of different ages. Meaning: I am a lifer. I grew up in the 80s and 90s. My worldview was formed by the mormonism of that time since birth. In my experience, there are parts of how I view and process the world that I am largely trying to outgrow, that are just not part of the worldview of a convert because they didn’t have that young exposure. My mind frequently goes back to lessons or songs I was taught when I was primary age. I watched a lot of church-related videos as a young child, listened to church-related songs (“I’m a mormon, yes I am…”). These are mind-shaping experiences that most converts do not have. Not all lifers have this same background, but few to no converts do. So yes, there are differences.
Now, my kids, who are also lifers (so far) have a different upbringing where, due to my choices AND how the church itself has changed, there are probably fewer differences between them and someone who converts as a young teenager. Part of that is also due to geography. I was raised in Utah. My kids are being raised where they are the vast minority.
TLDR: are there differences between a lifer raised in Utah in the 80s and 90s and a convert? Absolutely.
Wow, Quentin and Brad D, I’m not feeling the love! But if I’m stupid and uneducated as you say, well, contempt and love cannot co-exist.
But in your defense, you shared your honest feelings – I am glad this is a forum for honesty.
Oops! Brad D and josh h…
I think we may be forgetting the obvious–and it is that many converts (if not most) are moved upon by the Holy Ghost. The testimony of Jesus is powerful–and it can assuage doubts that arise from church history or anything else having to do with Kingdom.
Original leadership for my “mission field” hometown was from lifelong members. But as the church grew in the area more of the leadership was provided by converts.
So few “Utah Mormons” came our way in later years that those who did had an aura. Some old timers did not like this but the conflict was soft and manageable.
I’m always impressed by converts who embrace the church and contribute wholeheartedly to it. Why do some converts stick and others don’t? I think it is the mindset of the convert! Some come into the church determined to make it a key part of their identity. Other converts snack and enjoy what the church offers but they don’t orient their lives around the church, and distractions draw them away.