India Has Their First LDS Stake

[Indy Coug]

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/articl...st-stake-india

As a side note, the church is creeping up on 3,000 stakes; currently they are at 2,946.

[myboynoah]

As a side note, the church is creeping up on 3,000 stakes; currently they are at 2,946.

[Indy Coug]

I'll be here all week. Try the veal vindaloo.

[Blueintheface]

I don't get it.

[The Rambam]

There is no Church presence in Bombay/Mumbai which is the fourth most populous city in the world at 20.5 million. It is the richest and largest city in India. We don't even have an expat branch there in 2012. There are no missionaries serving there. There are no governmental restrictions on our being there (either missionaries or branches/wards).

It is great we now have our first stake in India. But we haven't even scratched the surface on the subcontinent.

I do believe that if the Church had wanted to, it had the resources and ability to have millions of members in India by now--missionaries have been allowed for over 20 years (a friend served there in 90-93 aprox.). We just have higher priorities than taking the gospel to India. Like maintaining a beautiful downtown Salt Lake City for high-end shopping. And buying land in Nebraska. And fighting to ensure government discrimination in granting marriage licenses in California. And building Temples in Brigham City and Payson and second temples in South Jordan and Provo. And so forth. India is far away and out of sight out of mind.

[Blueintheface]

There is no Church presence in Bombay/Mumbai which is the fourth most populous city in the world at 20.5 million. It is the richest and largest city in India. We don't even have an expat branch there in 2012. There are no missionaries serving there. There are no governmental restrictions on our being there (either missionaries or branches/wards).

It is great we now have our first stake in India. But we haven't even scratched the surface on the subcontinent.

I do believe that if the Church had wanted to, it had the resources and ability to have millions of members in India by now--missionaries have been allowed for over 20 years (a friend served there in 90-93 aprox.). We just have higher priorities than taking the gospel to India. Like maintaining a beautiful downtown Salt Lake City for high-end shopping. And buying land in Nebraska. And fighting to ensure government discrimination in granting marriage licenses in California. And building Temples in Brigham City and Payson and second temples in South Jordan and Provo. And so forth. India is far away and out of sight out of mind.

Here's the response you so desperately seek and yearn for:

[Indy Coug]

There is no Church presence in Bombay/Mumbai which is the fourth most populous city in the world at 20.5 million. It is the richest and largest city in India. We don't even have an expat branch there in 2012. There are no missionaries serving there. There are no governmental restrictions on our being there (either missionaries or branches/wards).

It is great we now have our first stake in India. But we haven't even scratched the surface on the subcontinent.

I do believe that if the Church had wanted to, it had the resources and ability to have millions of members in India by now--missionaries have been allowed for over 20 years (a friend served there in 90-93 aprox.). We just have higher priorities than taking the gospel to India. Like maintaining a beautiful downtown Salt Lake City for high-end shopping. And buying land in Nebraska. And fighting to ensure government discrimination in granting marriage licenses in California. And building Temples in Brigham City and Payson and second temples in South Jordan and Provo. And so forth. India is far away and out of sight out of mind.

Of course, all the things you mention in your last paragraph have absolutely no bearing, directly or indirectly on the allocation of missionary resources to India. The potential proselyting reach of the church currently outpaces its ability to sufficiently staff it with missionaries and afterwards train converts quickly and adequately enough to rapidly grow the church in many areas. In the past decade we have seen substantial consolidation/contraction of missions worldwide, particularly in the US and Western Europe.

The church could have had millions of members in Africa by now, but they have been smart(er) about managing the growth there than they have been in other parts of the world -- notably Latin America and the Philippines, where the struggles in these high growth areas have been well documented. This has and will pay long-term dividends in Africa.

[Goatnapper'96]

There is no Church presence in Bombay/Mumbai which is the fourth most populous city in the world at 20.5 million. It is the richest and largest city in India. We don't even have an expat branch there in 2012. There are no missionaries serving there. There are no governmental restrictions on our being there (either missionaries or branches/wards).

It is great we now have our first stake in India. But we haven't even scratched the surface on the subcontinent.

I do believe that if the Church had wanted to, it had the resources and ability to have millions of members in India by now--missionaries have been allowed for over 20 years (a friend served there in 90-93 aprox.). We just have higher priorities than taking the gospel to India. Like maintaining a beautiful downtown Salt Lake City for high-end shopping. And buying land in Nebraska. And fighting to ensure government discrimination in granting marriage licenses in California. And building Temples in Brigham City and Payson and second temples in South Jordan and Provo. And so forth. India is far away and out of sight out of mind.

My marketing manager used to routinely play the hired hands from "The Bombay House" in cricket matches while he was at the BYU. He organized the BYU Cricket Club. Am I the only one who thinks the shrimp tiki masalla is to die for at that Bombay House? Apparantly the owner of the Bombay House is heavily involved in LDS films. Perhaps he is too close to the Butcher...or something like that.

Trust me brother Rambam, the great Jehovah has yet to say the work is done and one day you will find a reason to pull your string at the advantages given to the saints of India at the expense of someplaceoranother!

Doubt not and be believing!

[Green Monstah]

I have some friends who served a service mission in India. The church paid for a mobile medical services clinic to visit the slums and provide free medical care. They manned the clinic and provided the doctors with support. If I ever go on a church mission, that's what I want to do.

[Goatnapper'96]

I have some friends who served a service mission in India. The church paid for a mobile medical services clinic to visit the slums and provide free medical care. They manned the clinic and provided the doctors with support. If I ever go on a church mission, that's what I want to do.

I wanna chase people out of the Celestial Room of the 8th temple in Utah County!

[The Rambam]

Here's the response you so desperately seek and yearn for:

??? There is a lot of navel gazing around here and a lot of ignoring the issues being addressed.

Of course, all the things you mention in your last paragraph have absolutely no bearing, directly or indirectly on the allocation of missionary resources to India. The potential proselyting reach of the church currently outpaces its ability to sufficiently staff it with missionaries and afterwards train converts quickly and adequately enough to rapidly grow the church in many areas. In the past decade we have seen substantial consolidation/contraction of missions worldwide, particularly in the US and Western Europe.

[Sigh] I am always surprised when orthodox members of the Church don't believe that the laws of time and scarcity and thermodynamics apply to the Church. As if they could fund all efforts at the same time, if they only wanted to; focus on all projects with equal effect; be in all places at 15 Apostolic moments in time.

But then you wildly pivot and admit that we can't staff India with missionaries and new-convert-trainers. Of course we can't. Under the current model and current paradigm with the current resources allocated, it would be impossible.

So let's throw up our hands and send a couple dozen missionaries a year to India and focus on beefing up the investment portfolio. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Our current batch of apostles have been called, to their face by a believing member, the worst Apostles in the history of Christianity. Because they spend a small fraction of their time proclaiming Christ and setting up others to proclaim Christ. Opting instead to spend their days in corporate governance and internal navel gazing and fighting policy battles with little eternal significance. While the members wallow in ignorance of Christ and unbelief in the atonement, worrying about masturbation or wearing a beard or white shirt or if they have gone to the Temple often enough last month. Unhappy, crushed by Church burdens and expectations and policies, they turn in greater numbers than any other culture to suicide and prescription drug use. But the corporate bottom line looks great, and have you seen those amazing fountains yet? Aren't the Temple Square trees, imported in with their pre-strung Christmas lights, dazzling! And did you see the high-profile singer they brought in for the extravaganza! No resources for India indeed.

The church could have had millions of members in Africa by now, but they have been smart(er) about managing the growth there than they have been in other parts of the world -- notably Latin America and the Philippines, where the struggles in these high growth areas have been well documented. This has and will pay long-term dividends in Africa.

Of course you can't think out of the box. Have you ever read Clayton Christensen (our Mormon rock star Harvard B-School prof and North East Area Authority)? He talks about how big successful organizations get fat and complacent and can't move and so get killed by small nimble start-ups. IBM->Microsoft->Google->Facebook->??? and so forth.

Well the Church is poster-boy #1 in the religious sphere. We had a model that worked pretty well in the post-WWII era. So it will be white shirts and ties forever!!! And young missionaries going out two-by-two on barely subsistence wages forever!!! Sure, we have put together a few fancy videos and a website or two, but the basic model is unchanged for the last 100 years. I was re-reading ETB's bio the other day and the account of his mission could have been the account of any modern missionary today (including the river jump run in many countries). We are hopelessly stuck.

And so exactly what you would expect to occur is occurring--we are being lapped in missionary work by the 7th Day Adventists, the Pentecostals, the Jehovah's Witnesses, others too. And it isn't even close.

The choice isn't limited to unmanageable and irresponsible growth v. slow, nearly zero real growth with a high missionary/member ratio in Africa/India. You could reject the whole paradigm and try something new. Maybe look at what is working so well for others. Maybe we can learn something. Or just sit back and build glamour malls and wait for a revelation while whisking off on Bro. Huntsman's Gulfstream to train the Asia Area Authorities (while ignoring the branches of Philippino sisters meeting a floor down, oppressed by their Hong Kong masters, missing their families back home, hungry for any love and blessing from a Church leader--yes I witnessed this first-hand).

Yes these are harsh realities, but they are real and no amount of running away with your hands over your ears or throwing stones at the messenger will change the facts on the ground. I rail because I care. This is God's church and these are God's children and I have invested my life in this cause. We can and should do better!!!

Trust me brother Rambam, the great Jehovah has yet to say the work is done and one day you will find a reason to pull your string at the advantages given to the saints of India at the expense of someplaceoranother!

Doubt not and be believing!

Ok. But when it happens, it will be as a result of a major paradigm shift on the part of the Church. Either the corporate managers they have brought in as Apostles will play against type and shake things up, or a new force will be brought to bear. I don't think God will abrogate agency and force them to move. It will take another SWK, a real leader willing to lead instead of a manager ably managing. Maybe a leader is hiding in the ranks. I hope so. Maybe Nielson? Maybe Holland?

[Goatnapper'96]

Ok. But when it happens, it will be as a result of a major paradigm shift on the part of the Church. Either the corporate managers they have brought in as Apostles will play against type and shake things up, or a new force will be brought to bear. I don't think God will abrogate agency and force them to move. It will take another SWK, a real leader willing to lead instead of a manager ably managing. Maybe a leader is hiding in the ranks. I hope so. Maybe Nielson? Maybe Holland?

If I were Robert the Bruce I would look at you chuckling and say "maybee you?"

I like your railing. It makes me laugh. I find you arrogant beyond all sufferability but the chances are others find me likewise. God bless and have faith that God's purposes won't be eternally frustrated. I did love the believer telling the Apostles that they suck shit when compared to all the ones of the past. Great stuff.

[Indy Coug]

I did love the believer telling the Apostles that they suck shit when compared to all the ones of the past. Great stuff.

I wonder who that believer was and what happened after they gave the Apostles a reality check?

[Sullyute]

I like your railing. It makes me laugh. I find you arrogant beyond all sufferability but the chances are others find me likewise. God bless and have faith that God's purposes won't be eternally frustrated. I did love the believer telling the Apostles that they suck shit when compared to all the ones of the past. Great stuff.

It looks like he fits in just fine with most of the posters here. I may not agree with all of his posts but I really enjoy reading his rants. He, like yourself and many other here, has a wonderful way with words.

[Indy Coug]

Here's an article from 20 years ago about the church in India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. While this is mostly an FYI post, here is a quote that is somewhat relevant to the discussion of the growth rate in India:

http://www.lds.org/liahona/1993/10/t...lanka?lang=eng

Q: What do you see in the future of the Church in this part of Asia?

A: Continuing growth is the expectation, as the Spirit touches people and as we are able to reach them. In this huge vineyard, the laborers have been comparatively few, but they have served well.

We’re trying right now to keep the Church as simple and basic as possible in all of these areas, so that members won’t feel overwhelmed by organizational structure as they’re learning to grow in the gospel.
At one sacrament meeting in Bangalore, India, not long ago, a fourteen-year-old boy gave a fine sacrament meeting talk. His twenty-year-old brother conducted the meeting; it was as well prepared and organized as any Church meeting anywhere. In some of these areas where the Church is small and comparatively new, we’re developing strong leaders for the future.