US Gen Z and Millennials Leaving Morman Church
Jana Riess
December 10, 2025
Alex Bass, as part of his Mormon Metrics Substack, has analyzed data from several national surveys while helping me and Benjamin Knoll with the quantitative research for our forthcoming book on the Mormon faith crisis. As always, when we’re looking at data about a small minority, we need to be mindful that the margin of error can be high. With this in mind, each of our graphs includes the error bars to show the range of possible findings.
The first graph from the General Social Survey, which asked about childhood religion as well as current religion, shows we’ve gone from retaining over three-quarters of childhood LDS members through the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, to keeping around 40% in the 2020s — a statistically significant drop.
In 2007, according to Pew Religious Landscape Studies, the LDS church retained 70% of childhood members in the U.S. (n = 581) In 2014, that was 64% (n = 661), and in 2023–24 it had declined still further to 54% (n = 525).
That 54% current retention rate looks better than the GSS’ 38%, so that’s potentially good news for LDS leaders. But once again, we’re witnessing a clear drop from the fairly recent past. Both major U.S. surveys that track childhood affiliation are saying that more people are leaving than used to.
Other religions used to envy our retention of youth. As sociologist Christian Smith put it in his recent book “Why Religion Went Obsolete,” the LDS church was once “legendary for its impressive retention rates among young people.”
Smith was the lead researcher 20 years ago for the National Study of Youth and Religion. That longitudinal study’s findings were so positive for the LDS church that they were written up in the Church News and trumpeted by the church’s official newsroom in 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2013.
But the data isn’t so sunny anymore, according to Smith’s research. “While Mormon retention looked solid in the early 2000s, in the years since, as Millennial Mormons moved through emerging adulthood, they began exiting the LDS church in dramatic, unprecedented numbers,” he wrote.
According to the GSS, only 29% of Greatest and Silent generation members left the church in the U.S. That increased slightly to 33% for the baby boomers and 37% for Generation X. Then it shot up to 55% for millennials and Gen Z
Ben’s analysis of Pew’s most recent data tells a similar story. The next graph shows a drop in retention between those born before 1960 (where 70% stayed LDS) and those born since 1980 (where only 49% stayed). The precise percentages aren’t the same as those of GSS, but the generational trajectory is.
I want to make one final observation. Both of these same surveys clearly show that those Mormons who remain identified with the church are often deeply religious. That’s true of LDS Gen Zers and millennials too: The ones who stay in the church are far more religiously devout than other Americans their age.
I’ll explore that more in the next column, but for now let me just say that more than one story can be true, even in the same data set.
My cousin and her ex-husband were visited by Mormon missionaries in the 70’s, shortly after their marriage. They converted and remained in the Church until their divorce. My cousin now drinks wine and her Ex has been married several times. Not sure about his status. My cousin’s one daughter is now an Evangelical. The other lives near Salt Lake City so I’m not sure. Her son’s only religion is money, as far as I can tell. No one has turned to the Catholic Church.
ReplyDeleteWhen Catholics and Mainland Protestants began losing their young people while the Evangelicals and the LDS were not, the sociological explanation was that strict churches which demanded more of their members (e.g. the Catholic Friday abstinence practice) were more likely to keep them. That follows from the evidence that organizations that have strong initiation processes usually produce members having a greater value for their membership.
ReplyDeleteNow it appears that younger members of these more demanding religions are following the same exit route as the more liberal churches.
Of course, as Jana suggests, that does not mean that young very observant LDS members leave the church.
The lesson for Catholicism may be that emphasizing doctrine, morals, and practice does in fact produce a smaller purer church but at the cost of great numbers of potential members.
Catholicism has always been the model for the great church that attracts many people of different races, ethic groups and classes. Part of the way that Catholicism has been able to do that is because of the abundance of different spiritualities and saints as models. Catholics can be very different from each other without separating themselves into smaller purer groups.
Adopting some strict practices, e.g. celebration of the Hours, praying the Rosary often, meditative prayer, fasting, serving the poor, etc. may be more important in retaining Catholics than weekly church going, or beliefs.
Our local bishop whose pastoral letter emphasizes fifteen minutes of daily prayer, having a spiritual support group, being able to talk about one's spiritual journey and having specific mission projects may be going in the right direction.
Your comment sparks an interesting question in my mind:
DeleteDoes the Church only want well-catechized individuals who are thoroughly familiar with Catholic teaching and beliefs, and are prepared to obey them without question? The smaller, purer Church?
Or does it want a wide variety of adherents, including those who are fuzzy on teachings or reject some teachings, maybe resist being "churchy" but bring their kids up in the Church, identify as culturally Catholic, and subscribe to basic "love your neighbor" Christian (but not specifically Catholic) principles?
Like Jack said, more than one story can be true. The church can want the well catechized members, but also want to keep the more cultural ones who are a bit fuzzy on teachings. I think they try to engage the ones who aren't as well catechized to try and get them learn more. I see in this week's bulletin that our parish is giving away copies of Matthew Kelly's book, "The Seven Pillars of Catholic Spirituality", saying that the initiative aims to inspire and encourage people to cultivate lasting spiritual habits in the coming year.
DeleteThey've given away Matthew Kelly books before, and while I'm not a particular fan, I'll keep an open mind and read it. I'll say for him that he doesn't seem to be political or focused on culture war issues.
I think learning more is what drives a lot of people away.
Delete"Does the Church only want well-catechized individuals who are thoroughly familiar with Catholic teaching and beliefs, and are prepared to obey them without question? The smaller, purer Church?"
DeleteA few random thoughts:
* I think the church shouldn't insist on being well-catechized as a precondition for membership. Christians should look upon catechesis - or better, faith formation - as an on-going, lifelong endeavor. Personally, I think folks whose starting point is outside formal attachment to the church should receive enough formal instruction to have a reasonably clear understanding of what they're freely choosing to join, with the understanding that one can go much, much deeper if one is willing - and we have the rest of our lives to do so. The "much deeper" should be understood to mean, "deeper in faith" and "deeper in spiritual experience", at least as much as "deeper in knowledge".
* The church shouldn't want to be smaller and purer, if that means driving out those who are viewed (by whom?) as being insufficiently pure.
* That said, I think there always will be social and cultural forces that make the church tend toward being smaller. I think the basic tension is: there are things about Christianity that some non-Christians find attractive, and evangelizing efforts will attract these seekers; but these social and cultural forces will cause some of these evangelized to fall away. I think this was the pattern of the New Testament church, which the Parable of the Sower attempts to explain.
* The religious milieu of the New Testament was syncretism: by and large, people tended to borrow whatever elements of a wide variety of religions seemed practical or relevant: a smidgeon of nature-deity paganism, a dash of mystery religion, a dose of official Roman cult of the emperor. Over and against this, the early church insisted on the primacy of God, and a rejection of everything else. I guess we could say, it was more demanding than syncretism. But it also offered spiritual riches: personal experience of the risen Jesus and the Holy Spirit that, I daresay, many contemporary Christians never, or almost never, experience.
* The standard view of Roman Catholicism as an institution of secretive, celibate-but-not-really, powerful and wealthy men in odd vestments, shouldn't be the essence of what the church is all about; and if that is people's perception, then the church is failing in its mission.
"... there are things about Christianity that some non-Christians find attractive, and evangelizing efforts will attract these seekers; but these social and cultural forces will cause some of these evangelized to fall away ... which the Parable of the Sower attempts to explain."
DeleteThat sounds about right, but the Parable of the Sower is kind of a zero-sum game. I wouldn't say that the seeds sown during my sojourn in the Church fell on my soul as if it were barren soil.
My faithlessness may not let me into Heaven for eternity with the rest of you (assuming there is a hereafter where God sorts us all ou), but I have probably lived a better life for the experience than I might have done otherwise.
FWIW - I don't recall anything you've shared with us that would lead me to think should despair of being with God forever. I think you should continue to be honest about difficulties and qualms, and live in hope.
DeleteNo one should despair, but a lot of us might want to revise our expectations.
DeleteI think Jesus saves a few of us from the finality of death to live in Heaven.
And many more of us from being complete pains in the ass to others while we live out our lives here.
As I take stock of my life, I am content and give thanks that Jesus helped me squeak into the latter camp, though there are still a few things I need to do penance for.
I think that youth retention has a lot to do with whether kids grow up immersed in a like-minded community. I would bet that kids in mostly Mormon towns in Utah stay in the church. Social and familial ties, as much as religious belief, keep denominations going. Thinking of my Amish in-laws, for ex.
ReplyDeleteOur town has a few Mormons. Sometimes you will see young people very neatly dressed, in pairs walking around. Chances are they are doing their two years of mission work. They volunteer for a lot of things like literacy projects and food pantry. My husband will chat them up when he sees them around. Mormon theology seems kinda weird, but I have a favorable impression of the ones I've met.
ReplyDeleteWhen young Mormons leave, do they become Nones?
ReplyDeleteAccording to this article, most former Mormons don't join another church: https://religionnews.com/2024/03/07/who-is-leaving-the-lds-church-8-key-survey-findings/
DeleteA higher percentage of Mormons who leave are LGBTQ or are divorced.
Off topic, but is anybody sending out Christmas cards any more? I still enjoy sending them, but I think most people are not. I may have to give it up so as not to make people feel guilty for not reciprocating.
ReplyDeleteI send a few cards out. Mostly to people I won't see in person around the holidays. I won't see any of my siblings this year, so sending to them, and my 90 year old aunt. Some out of town friends. Some of the nieces and nephews do cards, some don't. I enjoy seeing pictures of their kids. If people have sent cards to us, I reciprocate. I am always late getting them sent, like today. I think that's okay, they will enjoy them the same. I don't do a "Christmas letter", but I do hand write a short note.
DeleteThat reminds me, I need to get a gift card for my sister whose birthday is Dec. 24. If I send it today it will get there.
DeleteI might keep a stack of New Year's cards on hand to write notes to reciprocate with people who still bother with cards. I think a lot of people are downsizing Christmas, which I am for when it comes to overeating and overspending. But as a "shut in," the cards were a nice way to keep in touch. Plus, they looked nice hanging on the door.
DeleteI do send them. I have a list of ~100 people to whom I send them each year. Relatives, friends, parish co-workers. I don't send them to my "day-job" co-workers. I have an MS Word list that prints Avery labels with their addresses, so the envelope addresses aren't handwritten.
DeleteBefore our kids reached adulthood, I used to sign the cards on behalf of everyone in the family, and I used to include a one-page Christmas letter with the conventional reporting/bragging of milestones (X graduated from middle school; Y got a new job; etc.). Now that they're all adults, I figure they can all send their own Christmas cards if they're so inclined (which they're not). That said: quite a few of my contemporaries' Christmas cards have gone from nuclear-family to multi-generation, as their kids have grown, married and had kids. Typically, the cards will include pictures of our friends, their adult children and the grandkids. I confess that, beyond a certain (narrow) degree of blood relations, my level of interest in other people's grandkids is pretty minimal, but at least feigning interest is one of those little marks of courtesy that keeps the wheels of society properly lubricated, I guess.
I used to do an "anti-newsletter" with book/movie reviews, a photo from our yearly camping trip (usually about the time The Boy had run out of clean clothes and had gone feral), updates on our many cats, and life's "highlights." People seemed to like it.
DeleteI quit about 20 years ago when my parents started going downhill. Life got grim at that point, and I couldn't muster the humor. I did save copies, and The Boy likes reading them.
Religious affiliation appears is more about our relationships with the people around us and their practice of religion than with our relationship to God, or our religious beliefs.
ReplyDeleteFor example, the dynamics of becoming a member of a cult have been well studied because of the allegations of brainwashing. Potential members of a cult first hang out with cult members, then begin engaging of some of their behavior, and only finally in their beliefs.
In mixed marriages, the partner that spends less time with members of their own faith and more time with members of their partner’s faith is more likely to change their religious affiliation.
In the fifties there were less mixed marriages, and more people went to church. The option of replying “none” was not yet available on surveys. People were reluctant to identify themselves as atheists and agnostics. The idea that one could be spiritual but not religious was not readily available. Now people feel very comfortable with not having a religion because there are many people like them.
The Mormons convert people by inviting them to their homes for “family” night where they talk about the role that religion plays in their family life. Only after candidates are well accustomed to Mormon family life are they invited to congregational meetings and the beginning of Mormon religious education.
Just as Mormon affiliation begins in Mormon homes it seems likely that it begins to come apart there as Mormon marriages come apart and as they begin to relate to many non-Mormons in their homes, neighborhoods, and workplaces.
Catholics put a lot of emphases upon religious education (classes and schools) when children live at home with their families, but most of their children’s relationships will be with non-Catholics when they move away from home to go to college or take a job. They easily end up marrying non-Catholics.
Catholicism completely neglects the practice of praying the Hours either individually, in groups, or at home. As someone who has prayed the Hours from childhood, I think that practice has kept my religious faith far more than attendance at Sunday Mass or involvement in parish life. Those were not easy when I was in academia. Most of the time they were very boring. Searching for a parish was time consuming, and often unproductive.
My understanding of Catholicism is very sophisticated from a lifetime of study of scripture, liturgy, and spirituality. However, all that study is something that I share with only a few lay Catholics. Most of the clergy are very threatened by my intellectual activity so it is not something that bonds me to them or most of the members of the parish.
I wouldn't say my understanding of Catholicism is brainy or scholarly. But, no, the clergy and Church Ladies do not want to hear what I know about medieval hagiography. They wanted me to make CCD treats, take direction on decorating the Church, bus tables at Bingo and fish frys, and to keep my mouth shut. Which I did for 10 years until The Boy was confirmed. I expect that it was good for my ego.
DeleteKatherine - “ think they try to engage the ones who aren't as well catechized to try and get them learn more. …our parish is giving away copies of Matthew Kelly's book, "The Seven Pillars of Catholic Spirituality",
DeleteJean -“ I think learning more is what drives a lot of people away.”
As an adult, “learning more” about Catholicism did drive me away. I was quite devout as a kid. That lessened in college (a Catholic college) and I was ready to walk by the time I was 19. That was the year I spent in Paris, studying French at l’Institut Catholique. Le Cath was a hotbed of Vatican II theology, with lots of young priests from many countries studying for doctorates. Two of them, one American, taught our only non- French class - privately and in English. The American spent a lot of time with me drinking coffee in cafes, listening to all my questions and doubts. He told me about VII (this was shortly after its end, in 1966-67) and convinced me to stay. Our parish, after we married, was staffed with priests excited about VII. It had good adult Ed, bringing in priests from Georgetown, CU, and the several graduate seminaries in DC. These were “intellectual” classes and I learned a lot. I read a Matthew Kelly book once and thought it was aimed towards those at Fowler’s stage 3 of faith development. As my knowledge increased and my belief in Catholic/Christian teachings weakened, we still baptized the boys and sent them to Catholic independent schools after a disastrous year at a parochial school with our eldest. My Protestant husband always went along. I didn’t leave the RCC because of him, but because of its teachings. Liturgy is not something that matters much to me, but when it comes to liturgy, I prefer the ECUSA.