Of course the next question is why Messrs Herd et al. decided to highlight 'ten years' of baptisms - which we now know (finally!), when compared with the previous ten years shows a 14% decrease or effectively one congregation disappearing EACH DAY?
You see, Messrs Lett et al. could have choosen say last 'five years' of baptisms - that would have meant, when compared to the previous five years, there would have been an INCREASE - but they didn't!
No, they specifically decided to go with ten years with the underlying 14% decrease - why?
Well remember that Messrs Splane et al. said in that same paragraph that they should 'not boast in numbers'?
Why? Because the young Messrs Sanderson et al. are in this for the long haul - they are laying the foundation to prepare the people for a decrease over the next few years.
40 years on and 2014/15 is the new 1975/76?
That's all folks!
DarK SpliveR