[color=red]UPDATE[/color]: We’ve now uploaded an Excel spreadsheet with all of this data, so you armchair statisticians can do further analysis yourselves. You will find every year’s ASA data for each diocese, calculations as to relative change in ASA and in diocesan size ranking, several tables providing summary data, and 3 graphs. (The worksheet has 3 pages).
View or download the Excel spreadsheet here: {filedir_4}ECUSA_1992-2007_attend.xls
***
T19 reader Karen B. has reviewed the 15-year trend in attendance (Average Sunday Attendance or ASA) data for the Episcopal church and circulated her findings via e-mail. The results are striking:
For TEC domestic dioceses
Total ASA change: 1992 – 1997 = 2,005 (0.2% increase)
Total ASA change: 1997 – 2002 = 5,195 (0.6% increase)
Total ASA change: 2002 – 2007 = -118,818 (-14% DECREASE)
Put it this way. Look at the 10 year increase between 1992 – 2002 of 7,200 attendees. It would take 16.5 such 10 year periods (i.e. 165 years!) to make up the ASA decrease since 2002. WOW.
Data is based on ASA data for TEC domestic dioceses only.
A few more interesting tidbits re: the 15 year ASA trend data:
44 dioceses grew from 1992-1997
42 dioceses grew from 1997-2002
1 diocese grew from 2002-2007 (South Carolina at 1.8%)
For the 15 year period as a whole (1992-2007), 9 dioceses grew:
South Carolina (33%)
Tennessee (23%)
Western North Carolina (10%)
North Carolina (10%)
Texas (8.5%)
Atlanta (7%)
East Carolina (6.5%)
Alaska (4%)
Utah (1%)
The worst 10 dioceses over the 15 years (each of these 10 dioceses has had an attendance decrease of 30-40%):
Navaho Missions, Western New York, Northern Michigan, Northwest Texas, Central New York, Eastern Michigan, Western Kansas, Rochester, Quincy, Western Massachusetts
See also the Stand Firm discussion thread on this data (the comments offer some comparison data regarding attendance trends in other mainline denominations).
Note: All data was originally downloaded from the TEC website. (two PDF files: 1992 – 2002, and 1997-2007). The 1992-2002 PDF file (Dr. Kirk Hadaway’s cleaned and corrected data) no longer seems to be online. I originally downloaded it from this link.
[We elves have uploaded the PDF file Karen sent us. You can now find the 1992-2002 ASA data here.]
The official line has been that ‘numbers do not matter’, ‘the decline is purely demographic in nature and is inevitable’ and that ‘quality is more important than quantity’.
I agree with the first, the second is poppycock and the third is underlain by an appeal to snobbery.
What’s staggering is that while the decline has been acknowledged and discussed, none of the churches discussed by Karen B are in crisis mode. It’s as though the Enterprise were under attack, phaser blasts are buckling the shields, and Kirk and his command team are in the conference room discussing the shortage of red tunics onboard ship. At the very least lights should be flashing and the alarm should be sounding.
Mousestalker
The only thing that can be shown is a decline in numbers. Karen B’s “analysis” has no scientific or statistical validity. You could flash the lights and sound the alarm but it doesn’t really get you anywhere.
And the alarms won’t sound because “the result” is all that matters. Now what is “the result”? Sort of a cross between the left wing of the DNC and folks who like reading the NYT more than going to church.
#2, I disagree. What should be happening is a full and honest discussion of why there is a decline. That has to be followed up by a plan of action for correcting and reversing the trend.
The facts speak for themselves. The Episcopal Church is in decline. To dispute that is to deny reality. So, why is there a decline and what may be done to remedy it?
Further, why isn’t this discussion going on? Is it even on the agenda for GC?
Remember, though, that numbers in TEC do not really matter. While we might look at the evidence and see that Gamaliel was correct, TEC loyalists look at the numbers and proclaim that they are the faithful remnant and that God is now calling us to total ministry.
This divide can never be bridged.
numbers are interesting, but I’m not sure always what they say.
But I don’t think this has much to do with theology. It has a lot to do with demographic shifts. There are geographic, generational and cultural factors. 30-40% of young kids have no denomination.
Numbers do matter, if we can figure out what they are telling us.
Well, ECUSA’s increasing and decreasing dioceses are also where overall population has grown and dropped. But that does not explain all of it, for the % increases/decrease in the dioceses are higher than the overall population % increase/decrease. So something else is at play, we could endlessly debate the other causes.
I would presume ECUSA is struggling in the same areas where the other mainlines are as well.
All General Motors had was a decline in numbers because of a number of undetermined factors. TEC does not care and is unwilling to change.
[b] “30-40% of young kids have no denomination.”[/b]
John points to something that is an explanation waiting to happen.It goes like this:
The children of the sixties did not “force” religion on their children and these children had children even more distant yet.
These sixties folks also began a cultural curse of a “generic spirituality” without institutional anchor, and started the ball rolling of both a hermeneutic of suspicion about “organized religion” in general and contempt for Christianity in particular — with the only exception being what took place in galvanizing “the church” for political marches and rallies and social ministries loosely committed to what goes on on Sunday morning.
You couple all of this with the accomplishment of making participation in the Christian religion culturally neutral at best and stigmatized at worse and you have zero support for going to church or stigma for not getting up Sunday morning.
Then of course you add suburban sports which the public schools – -ever hostile to religion anyway — wedged in inch by inch so that church now competes with that as well.
Now of course those who started the ball rolling in the Summer of Love now run TEC. And we wonder about numbers.
Brian, I’m not following your comment in #2. How is this analysis not about numbers? What spin have I put on the data?
I have given no interpretation apart from suggesting that unless TEC were to grow faster than it did in 1992-2002 that it will take 165 years to recoup the losses from 2002-2007.
The numbers are real as collected and reported by TEC itself:
TEC ASA in 1992 = 839,440
TEC ASA in 1997 = 841,445
TEC ASA in 2002 = 846,640
TEC ASA in 2007 = 727,822
Overall in 15 years there has been a decline of -111,618 attendees in TEC parishes.
I did not specially choose the years to prove my point. Kirk Hadaway and the research team at TEC put together these 10 year spreadsheets. (92-02, 97-07). They just happen to be the earliest ASA data and the latest ASA data I have access to. And since there is a 15 year span, it is possible to look at the data in three 5-year periods. I did that, and I was really surprised, even though I’ve crunched TEC data for 5 years now. I really hadn’t realized just how drastic the decline beginning in 2001-2002 was. Those 5-year net-change figures jumped off the page at me. I thought it was worth sharing in the lead up to General Convention.
All, please note, I have said NOTHING anywhere here about theology, and don’t really intend to speculate further about the causes of the decline. I did just a little bit of that at Stand Firm (e.g. I think the creation of AMiA in 2000-2001 was actually a bigger factor than many of us realized.) But certainly there are many factors:
— Geography & Economic issues
— Theology
— Leadership
Certainly looking at the top 9 dioceses or bottom 10 dioceses in terms of ASA change over the 15 year period one can’t make sweeping generalizations. e.g. Quincy & Rochester both had abysmal declines in ASA in spite of being almost as far apart theologically as one can get in TEC.
This was not meant to be a thread where I present any conclusions. I just thought the pattern of the data over a 15 year span might interest some folks.
[blockquote]numbers are interesting, but I’m not sure always what they say.[/blockquote]
One thing you can bet the farm on: When JW says something like this, he’s absolutely sure what they say, though he will strive mightily to pretend otherwise.
#11. Jeffersonian,
That phrase caught my eye too. Thanks for translating it for me.
This one was what I had to chuckle at: [blockquote]But I don’t think this has much to do with theology[/blockquote] That is kind of like saying the Titanic sinking didn’t have anything to do with a leak.
The denial among liberal Protestants is just staggering, as reflected here by Brian in #2 and John Wilkins in #6. It would be comical, if it weren’t so serious.
Let’s put it this way, if TEC were a Fortune 500 company and its marketshare, profits, and stock value had fallen drastically and steadily for four decades, you can be absolutely sure that executive heads would’ve rolled long before now, and the board of directors would indeed be operating in crisis mode, as mousestalker rightly says in #1.
Alas, the leaders of the oldline denominations, including TEC, are a combination of clueless about how to turn things around, paralyzed by feeling helpless to do so, or are simply unwilling to do what it takes, because other vested interests are at stake that conflict with what it takes to grow. Personally, I think it’s a combination of all the above factors, but in the end, it comes down to the last point.
In the final analysis, it’s not so much a matter of cluelessness, or helplessness, but of stubborn wilfullness in choosing to grow smaller, older, and weaker (and more “progressive” of course) over growing bigger, younger, and spiritually stronger (and more orthodox and demanding). Dying congregations choose to grow smaller and older all the time rather than fundamentally change, and denominations can make the same fatal choice. And that’s the fate that the seven oldline (ex-mainline) denominations have sadly chosen
I make the opposite choice. Hence my choice to affiliate with the ACNA. It’s starting relatively small compared with TEC, but it’s growing significantly, and is highly likely to continue to grow for decades to come (if the Lord tarries). Just as say the PCA and EPC (two evangelical Presbyterian churches) have continued to grow while the lax, lenient, and liberal PCUSA continues on its disastrous downward spiral. Just like TEC.
Thanks, Karen, for doing all the homework.
David Handy+
When I was an Episcopalian, most of the churches, if not close to all, I attended lacked one important thing: young families. I attended an important parish in my diocese (and rather large as far as TEC parishes go), and adults always served because there were never any kids around. A church made up of most 50-70 year olds is going to see a rapid decline eventually, and I think we are seeing the inevitable happen now. A (rather liberal) priest I knew once joked that nationwide most Episcopal “youth” are graduate students, and asked “do we really care what all 6 of them think?” The Episcopal church is a demographic nightmare: old, childless, and lukewarm.
I make the opposite choice. Hence my choice to affiliate with the ACNA. It’s starting relatively small compared with TEC, but it’s growing significantly, and is highly likely to continue to grow for decades to come (if the Lord tarries). Just as say the PCA and EPC (two evangelical Presbyterian churches) have continued to grow while the lax, lenient, and liberal PCUSA continues on its disastrous downward spiral. Just like TEC.
Ah, Handy+. Always with the helpful analysis and solutions that point the way. So I need to place my faith in the place with the greatest growth. I have always been partial to mainline Christianity, but I guess I could try Islam or the Mormons. I’ll let you know how it works for me.
[i]But I don’t think this has much to do with theology.[/i]
As someone who is part of the decline in Episcopal ASA (having crossed the Tiber a year and a half ago), I can assure you that theology had [b]everything[/b] to do with it.
[blockquote]Ah, Handy+. Always with the helpful analysis and solutions that point the way. So I need to place my faith in the place with the greatest growth. I have always been partial to mainline Christianity, but I guess I could try Islam or the Mormons. I’ll let you know how it works for me. [/blockquote]
One thing you can say about the Muslims and Mormons: Their theologies don’t stampede off to the latest trendy port-side political saltlick at every opportunity.
RE: “The only thing that can be shown is a decline in numbers.”
Right — and that’s all that KarenB showed with her analysis.
RE: “Karen B’s “analysis†has no scientific or statistical validity.”
Huh? The numbers have no “scientific or statistical validity”?
Do you even know what the words “scientific,” “statistical” or “validity” mean?
Doesn’t appear so.
RE: “What should be happening is a full and honest discussion of why there is a decline. That has to be followed up by a plan of action for correcting and reversing the trend.”
Mousestalker — I think you’re missing the point. The decline of all of the bigots and homophobes and fundamentalists that suddenly appeared in The Episcopal Church needs to happen. Why would they wish to reverse that trend? It’s stunning that there were so many of them — thought all of this would be done by the end of 03, but alas that was not to be.
Should be at least another 10 years to have TEC decline sufficiently to have only really quality, sophisticated, inclusive people. ; > )
Not to be Florida-centric…. but I couldn’t help notice the sharp decline of my former diocese, the Dio of Florida. It expereinced the sharpest decline of any diocese from 02-07 at -29%. And this is after experiencing almost 9% growth from 97-02. That’s almost a 40% change in course. WOW!!
[sarcasm] Warning: “unscientific” analysis to follow. Read at your own risk. [/sarcasm] I can only deduce that this is due to the election of two bishops: VGR (very far awy) and SJH (entirely too close).
Do the latest numbers include ASA from dioceses and churches that have left TEC? It is my understanding that my family of 5 has been counted as being members of the diocese of Los Angeles for several years now even though we (along with everyone else at St. James Newport Beach) left a while ago.
Kevin S., it varies by diocese. For instance the big drop in Virginia does reflect the approx 15 parishes/missions which left. The congregations were removed from the rolls almost within hours of the votes as if they’d never existed (i.e. not even the historical stats exist online).
Other dioceses like LA keep posting the same ASA & membership figures for departed parishes year after year after year.
Certainly the 2007 data does not yet reflect the mass exodus of most of San Joaquin, Pittsburgh, Fort Worth and Quincy. So there are more large losses yet to show up.
Basically the best way to tell to what extent already-departed parishes are reflected in the 2007 data is to look at the TEC charts page. In some analysis I did related to SE Florida recently, I had the opportunity to look at all the diocese’s charts. If you add up the approximate ASA showing on all the charts it matches the reported ASA figure for 2007 for the diocese. The charts and the ASA data should match. So if you see a parish with a huge drop because most of the congregation left, or if a parish is “disappeared” from the diocesan charts page altogether, you will know that the departure has been counted in the stats.
Perhaps one way to look at this is the way one would look at a public company – the attendees are the shareholders. In this case book value per share is moving up as they retain assets and reduce the number of shares outstanding.
Hm – if we could be absolutely sure the decline had something to do with theology, we wouldn’t see growth in parishes like All Saint’s Pasadena or Beverley Hills, St. Paul’s Norwalk (CT), St. Bartholomew’s NYC, All Saint’s, Ravenswood (Chicago) or St. Paul and the Redeemer in Hyde Park, Chicago. If theology is the primary issue, then why would any progressive church grow? Likewise, if theology were the primary issue than why aren’t all conservative churches growing? What is certainly true is the conflicted churches lose members. Leaders who encourage conflict will find themselves with smaller parishes.
The reason churches are declining is more likely the same reason other organizations, like Rotary, are declining. The dissolution of civil society generally. The church, instead of being a family, is now a franchise. We’re now a market based institution, offering a spiritual product. It’s one of the benefits of capitalism: we can purchase whatever made up religion that suits us. I don’t complain much, because I think that capitalism changes things for the better. It just happens also to have changed our religious landscape.
This is where leadership comes in. I happen to agree that the Episcopal Church does not have particularly strong or energetic leadership, where it matters – with some exceptions. It may be that strong leadership tends to work better with conservative theology – and I think there is some empirical evidence for that as both insist on strong boundaries.
Hm – I happen to agree with Handy on a few points. “because other vested interests are at stake that conflict with what it takes to grow.”
Yes. As long as congregations decide to run things in the same way, that is absolutely true. As long as leaky roofs are more important than mission; as long as people try to maintain their own comfort rather than reaching out and building relationships with others.
I don’t understand what the current ideological divisions have to do with that: resistance to growth is common all over the (theological) place.
[blockquote]Hm – if we could be absolutely sure the decline had something to do with theology, we wouldn’t see growth in parishes like All Saint’s Pasadena or Beverley Hills, St. Paul’s Norwalk (CT), St. Bartholomew’s NYC, All Saint’s, Ravenswood (Chicago) or St. Paul and the Redeemer in Hyde Park, Chicago. If theology is the primary issue, then why would any progressive church grow? Likewise, if theology were the primary issue than why aren’t all conservative churches growing?[/blockquote]
Of course this is a straw man. The question isn’t whether all conservative parishes are growing or whether any leftie ones are (though even some of the supposed bright spots JW calls out are just treading water or are actually in typical TEC decline). It’s whether, on average, there is a divergence in the growth/decline trend among conservative and liberal parishes and diocese. I don’t have those figures, but I’d know which way I’d bet.
All Saint’s, Pasadena has grown and the Church is shamed because of it. Some of the most radical churches will grow as the church becomes polarized, but overall the dioceses shrink.
One cannot do an experiment with two Episcopal denominations and in one bless homosexuals but not in the other. Such an experiment can’t be done. Does this mean one can’t prove causality? Of course not. One can look at the liberality of the denominations and their rates of decline. There is a strong correlation between these two. Scientifically, this is the only way to demonstrate causality. In particular, the most liberal church with respect to homosexuality and abortion is the fastest declining (the UCC). The second most liberal church was last year’s fastest declining and this year’s fourth fastest declining (the TEClub). Now, certainly there are other reasons for denominations to decline. Look at the LCMS. One has to wonder where would the Roman Catholic Church be if not for the clergy abuse scandal. Note that the only denominations that are growing (Mormons, Catholics, Assemblies of God, and Church of God), are conservative with respect to these issues.
People that are honest, will admit that homosexual “tolerance” is disastrous with respect to overall numbers. John Wilkins is not being honest, but Susan Russell is. She states that this is the “cost of discipleship.” (That someone who is so antithetical to everything Bonhoeffer stood for would have the audacity to reference him makes me ill.)
P.S. St. Bartholomew’s NYC??? Attendance was 1025 in 2001 and has dropped to 650 (http://tinyurl.com/njml2j ). The irony is that their “director of church growth” is a syndicated columnist whose essays occasionally appears in the newspapers.
John Wilkins (#23-24),
Although Jeffersonian and robroy have offered good responses, let me add a reply of my own. You’re right, of course, that there are a few liberal congregations that are growing, and many more conservative ones that are declining, so yes, there is no simple, one-to-one correlation between theological conservatism and growth, or liberalism and decline. Naturally, as any sensible person would expect, there are multiple factors involved in whether or not specific congregations or dioceses grow, stagnate, or decline.
But I think Dean Kelley’s controversial thesis in his classic book, [b] Why Conservative Churches Are Growing [/b] has stood the test of time very well. In the preface to the expanded, updated second edition in the 1980s, he admitted that he wished he could retitle the book, “Why Strict Churches Are Strong.” That is, his hypothesis was actually that it wasn’t so much theological conservatism per se, but the seriousness and strictness with which churches operated, and the degree of high commitment expected of their leaders and members that really mattered. Churches like All Saints, Pasadena actually thus confirm Kelley’s thesis, in that they are high demand churches that expect their people to take their commitment to the gospel and social justice very seriously (i.e., the gospel as they understand it, of course, with all its radical social implications).
To put it another way, people that really care deeply about religious matters and are passionate about church affairs tend to migrate to congregations (and denominations) that project high expectations and that honor and reward zeal, rather than implicitly discouraging it as unseemly fanaticism.
Stated yet another way, expectations tend to be self-fulfilling prophecies. You generally get the level of commitment from church members that you expect of them. And it’s only natural that high expectation churches will also tend to be high performance churches, and low demand churches will tend to be low performers in terms of growth and vitality.
That’s why I like to joke that while I love incense, Gregorian chant, and gorgeous chasubles, what really matters to me is that I’m strongly drawn to congregations that are “high church” in a more important way. I want to be a part of a parish, and diocese, and denomination that’s definitely a high commitment, high demand church that won’t tolerate minimalist discipleship. That’s why I can happily worship at present in an AMiA congregation in Newport News, VA, that’s quite low church liturgically, but very high church in terms of the level of commitment that’s expected and encouraged in terms of following Jesus faithfully in our daily lives.
I revel in high octane, high voltage, high performance Christianity. I absolutely detest and abhor state church religion with its minimlaist standards. Which is why I keep harping about the need for Anglicanism to mutate into a “Post-Christendom,” post-Constantinian style that’s suited for the highly secularized, pluralistic, neo-pagan cultural context in which we now live in the Global North.
I’m well aware of how radical and revolutionary that is. And how unpopular it will be with many conservative Anglicans, much less with liberal and broad church ones. But I refuse to settle for anything less than authentic, biblical Christianity, which is extremely costly and demanding. But the rewards are even greater, and they are eternal.
David Handy+
Passionate advocate of high commitment, high octane Christianity
[blockquote]All Saint’s, Pasadena has grown and the Church is shamed because of it. [/blockquote]
I’d agree with the shamed part, and membership roles have grown but that doesn’t seem to have translated into ASA, which is essentially flat over the last decade.
Karen B and Sarah
The problems with this are myriad. I’ll try to list the major problems that affect your ‘data’ and assumptions below:
1. There is no scientific method to the data gathering.
-ASA is not membership
-ASA is transient-no way of knowing members or visitors or friends/family/etc.
-ASA is reported by individual people in individual parishes who often differ from week to week
Just because information is reported by TEC, doesn’t mean it is accurate. Parishes report membership also. Membership determines their Diocesan assessment. It is to a parishes advantage to underreport membership and to lower ASA figures to fit the membership numbers
2. Any presentation of ‘raw data’ is an interpretation. To claim that you are simply reporting is a red herring.
3. There are no statistically valid correlations established in your reporting format. While you may not reach the conclusions that those on the blog reach, you still offer them up as presentations of fact.
These are truly bizarre objections, Brian. Do you have some evidence that TEC parishes and dioceses have been systematically falsifying their ASA and membership numbers? Further, has this falsification been such that parishes and dioceses have been deliberately increasing the margin by which they underreport ASA in recent years? How do you know this?
Aside from that would you accept, say, linear regressions of the ASA numbers where the calculated slope confidence intervals are such that one can reject the null hypothesis (i.e. that there hasn’t been any decline)? What statistics are you willing to accept?
Brian, I agree with Jeffersonian, your complaints are very odd. But you want membership numbers? I’ve got ’em:
[b]TEC domestic dioceses baptized membership: 1992 – 2002[/b]
1992: about 2,400,000
[i](this is a figure pulled from looking at a graph – I don’t have Redbook data — if anyone has the exact number I would like it)[/i]
1997: 2,344,718
2002: 2,320,221
2007: 2,116,749
Since 1992, a loss of about 283,251 members
since 2002, a loss of 203,472
You can find the [url=http://ecusa.anglican.org/documents/Members_by_Prov__Diocese_97-07.pdf]diocesan membership data here for 1997 – 2007[/url] (PDF file)
I do also have domestic “Communicant in Good Standing” data for 1992 and 2002 courtesy of [url=http://www.ncs.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/communicants92_02.html]Louie Crew[/url]. The 2007 data is from the [url=http://ecusa.anglican.org/documents/2009_Red_Book_Table_of_Statistics_by_Prov__Diocese.pdf]2007 TEC Redbook data here.[/url]
[b]COMMUNICANTS:[/b]
1992: 1,614,081
2002: 1,902,525
2007: 1,720,477
Thanks to the increase of 288,444 in 1992 – 2002, there is still a net positive for the 15 years. But since 2002, TEC has lost 182,048 communicants.
So, let’s summarize:
since 2002:
a decline of 118,818 in ASA
a decline of 283,251 baptized members
a decline of 182,048 communicants in good standing
Take your pick. Anyway you slice them, the numbers are awful.
Oh, and in case you care, one more bit of data:
[b]Domestic Dioceses – Total Parishes & Missions:[/b]
1992: about 7400 (again, I’m reading off a graph, I’d like exact data if anyone has it)
1997: 7366
2002: 7305
2007: 7055
Since 2002 a loss of 250 parishes & missions
By the way, it’s very worth reading or re-reading Dr. Kirk Hadaway’s excellent 2002 – 2003 report [url=http://www.episcopalchurch.org/documents/2004GrowthReport(1).pdf]”Is the Episcopal Church growing or declining”[/url] (PDF file)
It discusses the relative advantages of measuring growth by ASA, membership or congregant data. I believe Dr. Hadaway, and also many folks who care about seeing the denomination grow tend to think ASA is the most accurate reflection of church growth. (I was reading something over the weekend by longtime and noted revisionist TEC Exec Council member Ted Mollegan about that.)
I think some of Dr. Hadaway’s conclusions from that report are worth highlighting. I’ll do that in a separate comment.
Ok, here are some conclusions from Dr. Hadaway’s report on growth/decline in TEC: (written, I believe in 2003 after reviewing and adjusting 1992 – 2002 data to account for changes in the Parochial reports over those years, and to make reporting of domestic vs. overseas dioceses consistent.) I have added a few annotations.
[blockquote]A … look at the statistics (membership and attendance) reveals that we have reached a plateau of sorts [i][as the full report discusses there was some growth in the 90’s after much decline in the 70s and 80s – but that was already leveling off and beginning to drop in 2002-2003][/i] —[b]from which we can slide into a new decline or begin growing again.[/b] [i][obviously the former happened][/i]
The problems facing the Episcopal Church are daunting due to the nature of our main constituency. As long as we are a predominantly white denomination with aging, affluent, highly educated members, growth will be increasingly difficult. There is hope, however, because the Episcopal Church is attractive to people brought up in other religious traditions and to unchurched seekers, and [b]statistically the Episcopal Church is the healthiest denomination in the mainline.[/b] [i][This is quite true for the 1990s. The contrast between TEC and for instance PCUSA during that period is quite striking.][/i] But it will require much more than business as usual to expand into other constituencies (the less educated, immigrants, Hispanics, the unchurched). It will take new churches and a new openness among our existing parishes. It will take having something to offer newcomers that changes lives. […]
Finally, it should be noted that denominational growth (and decline) is not the same as congregational growth (and decline). The Episcopal Church declined by 8,201 members in 2002. That represents an average loss of 1.1 member per church—too few to be noticed in most congregations. We have many vibrant healthy churches and also many declining congregations. Unfortunately, declines among the latter tend to cancel out growth among the former. Clearly we need more vibrant healthy churches, but growing as a denomination will require systemic changes, so that the average loss of 1.1 might turn into an average gain of 1.1, 2.2, or even more. Even tiny gains across a denomination of 7,300 churches would produce growth of a kind that we have not seen since 1966.[/blockquote]
I made almost this exact same point yesterday in the discussion at [url=http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/23333/#373849]Stand Firm:[/url]
[blockquote]tired, #67, yes I too was thinking about what these members meant in terms of change in ASA per parish & mission.
The growth of 7200 attendees from 1992-2002 equates to roughly 1 attendee per parish or mission (though of course that is not the real average nor the median).
As for the decline, it equates to every parish losing about 16-18 attendees. Put like that, it doesn’t sound so daunting to overcome, does it? Except that in reality you’ve got parishes and dioceses bleeding hundreds and thousands of attendees and members, and so even if many parishes/dioceses grow modestly in the years ahead, overcoming those that are in absolute crisis will be difficult, to put it mildly.[/blockquote]
If every one of TEC’s 7055 or so parishes & missions gained 17 attendees, it would make up for the loss of nearly 119,000 attendees since 2002.
Karen, I’ve run some quick linear regressions and they look even worse than just using the 2007 endpoint attendance figures. These regressions provide a “best-fit” line through the data. A positive slope indicates growth, a negative decline (I haven’t run the tests for statistical significance yet, however). Here are the quick-n-dirty results:
* From 1992 to 2000, 49 dioceses had a positive slope and ECUSA as a whole did, too, showing an average trend of 2,324 more attendees per annum.
* From 2001 to 2007, only one (1) diocese – South Carolina – shows a positive slope of 87 attendees per annum. TEC as a whole trends down at a rate of 22,520 attendees per annum.
* Just looking at the post-VGR numbers, zero (0) dioceses trend upward from 2003 to 2007, with TEC overall trending downward at a pace of 23,533 attendees per annum.
In other words, TEC peaked in 2000 then began to decline. The decline is accelerating and affecting all dioceses now, even those that managed to grow after TEC as a whole peaked.
Why in the world would any church deflate its attendance numbers? Is it in anyone’s interest to give the impression that the church is dying? I know that this is not science but it works for me.
Brian, I’m doubtful that I’ll get any reply from you, but just in case you are still reading this and really meant what you wrote rather than merely making specious objections just to be difficult, here’s a bit more about the question of ASA vs. membership.
Nationally, TEC has a ASA to member percentage of about 34% for 2007.
ASA: 727,822
Members: 2,116,749
ASA to members 34.4%
The ASA to members % has dropped slightly from an average of 36% in the 90s.
By comparison PCUSA (which seems to be much more diligent in cleaning its rolls and tracking members, as viewed by its annual reports online) has an ASA to member ratio of 49% up from 45% in 1992. ELCA’s ASA to member ration is even lower than TEC’s:
29% in 2007, down from 31% in 1992.
Not to make money the be all end all, but if you want a real measure of commitment and vitality in a parish, perhaps you should use “pledging units” – and in TEC that seems to more closely track ASA than it does membership, suggesting that TEC has many “ghosts” on its member rolls.
2002 Domestic Dioceses: Pledging Units = 598,482
2007 Domestic Dioceses: Pledging Units = 516,532
That’s a decline of 81,950 pledging units since 2002 or -14%, which is about identical to the percentage decline in ASA.
The membership decline is 9%
The communicant decline is 10%
The decline in number of parishes is 3%
Re: Pledging Units:
[url=http://www.tens.org/docs/parochial-reports/2002ParochialReport.pdf]2002 data is here[/url]
[url=http://www.dfms.org/documents/Financial__ASA_Totals_by_Diocese_2007.pdf]2007 data is here[/url]
Just for fun, (yeah, I know, I really need to get out more, but the nightlife is not so hot in West Africa) I recently did some analysis of every parish in the diocese of SE Florida over the past 10 years. A couple of facts about ASA and membership and pledges stand out.
SE Florida has had an ASA decline of 15% from 1997 – 2007, which puts it dead center in the median of TEC. Rank #50.
During these 10 years membership declined only 2%
Pledging Units declined by 13%,
yet Total Plate & Pledge increased 45%
Once again, Pledging units more closely match ASA. It is the attendees who give.
ASA to Membership ratio in SE Florida declined from 43% to 37%
Average Pledge per ASA was $874 in 1997
Average Pledge per ASA was $1488 in 2007
an average pledge increase per attendee of 70% per attendee in 10 years.
Average Pledge per Member was $376 in 1997
Average Pledge per Member was $557 in 2007
an average increase of 48%
– i.e. it is NOT the members who are committed to and supporting the church, but the attendees. Note: TEC focuses its financial analysis on pledge per ASA or pledge per pledging units, not pledge per member.
Look at the stats below for some parishes in SE Florida for 1997 – 2007. To my understanding, all of these parishes are in crisis. (Reduced from parish to mission, subject of a “diocesan rescue plan”, etc.)
Parish: ASA change // Member Change // Pledge Change %// Pledge per ASA % change // 2007 Pledge per ASA ($)
Holy Redeemer: -43% // -10% // -70% // -48% // $411
St Andrew: -55% // -1% // 8% // 138% // $3250
St. Christopher’s: -68% // -17% // 88% // 480% // $4712
St Columba: -38% // 20% // 14% // 84% // $1885
St. Faith’s: -55% // 11% // -13% // 94% // $1412
St. James: -45% // -15% // 67% // 206% // $2500
Transfiguration: -62% // -5% // 38% // 258% // $2200
Perhaps for St. Christopher’s or St. James’s with their 17% and 15% declines in membership you might know there’s a crisis. Certainly for Holy Redeemer, the big drop in Pledge Income would signal a crisis. But for 4 of these parishes, member and pledge data wouldn’t likely give you a clue that the parishes are in crisis.
St. Andrew’s: ASA decline of 55% from 220 to 100, but only a 1% decline in members
St. Columba’s: ASA decline from 82 to 54, but a 20% increase in members???
St. Faith’s ASA decline from 190 to 85 but an 11% increase in members??
Transfiguration: ASA decline from 130 to 50, but only a 5% decrease in members.
At least for these parishes, and many others, ASA tells a very important story and signals a crisis before other data might reveal it. There are explicit instructions for measuring ASA. Membership is a much more difficult thing to measure or track and often very slow in TEC to catch up with changes in ASA, and thus not necessarily a very sensitive measure of parish health. ASA is usually a more sensitive indicator of change, both positively or negatively.
Finally, just a note as to why I’ve included pledge data in this discussion of SE Florida. In many parishes that are dying, you have a very loyal few increasingly giving more and more to try and keep the parish going. Very high % increases in pledge per ASA may indicate such a situation. In fact, of the 15 parishes in SE Florida with the largest % increase in pledge per attendee over the past 10 years, 11 look to be in crisis with huge drops in ASA. The remaining attendees are trying to give more to make up for all the attendees who’ve disappeared.
Example: St Christopher’s Key Biscayne: The pledge per attendee increased from $812.5 in 1997 to $4711.5 in 2007, a 480% increase (there was a 68% decline in ASA in the 10 year period). Ouch. Remember, that’s the AVERAGE pledge per attendee. That means lots of folks are having to give much more, even though a pledge of $4700+ is already very very high by TEC’s standards.
This parish data from SE Florida is fairly subjective. Just some parishes I thought worth highlighting since I have some personal knowledge of the diocese. But it is meant to give some real world examples of when ASA may be a better figure to track than membership.
Karen –
Where to even begin with your deeply flawed conclusions of declining membership and ASA…
First, you are using whole integers to represent the membership and ASA totals. Everybody knows that TEC uses complex numbers (i.e., a real and imaginary component).
Second, you’re not even using Pi, e, Bernoulli’s equation, or Avogadro’s number. To do real math you need to use things like these.
Third, if for 2007 you include those that have driven past an Episcopal church in the membership and ASA totals, you will actually see an increase of 26,927% from 2006 to 2007
And finally, your “analysis†does not take into account that for 2005 both Easter AND Pentecost fell on a Sunday (Otherwise known as the “Easter Effectâ€), which can artificially skew your so called “Mathâ€. If you take this into account, you will clearly see that TEC membership is still at the healthy 2.4 million advertised number, that no churches or dioceses have left, and that there is nothing to be alarmed about.
#36, LOL! 🙂
Do you have some evidence that TEC parishes and dioceses have been systematically falsifying their ASA and membership numbers?
Primary and second hand. But the issue is not falsification-it is scientific rigor. Data collection is not uniform. There are no controls and no incentives for accuracy.
Aside from that would you accept, say, linear regressions of the ASA numbers where the calculated slope confidence intervals are such that one can reject the null hypothesis
No. I recognize (as anyone should) that there is a decline.
What statistics are you willing to accept?
You are free to put your faith in whatever you want.
#31 Karen B
First, who is claiming that there is not a decline in actual numbers? I have not seen anyone claiming this?
Second, I don’t know what your background (or Dr Haddaway’s) is in statistics, but when you start with bad data, you get bad results. No journal, no university, not even a high school math teacher would accept the data. It’s crunching of data points that have no standard method of collection. It’s a waste of time.
I know that this is not science but it works for me.
Pb says it all. If it is fun for you to play with numbers, great. If you wish to present this as fact, you’re off.
Karen B
You are trying to defend a methodology for an indefensible study. Look, I can go around and collect all of the reports of all of the UFO sightings from all of the cities and towns in the US. I can then extrapolate the number of alien visitors for each year. It’s ridiculous, but I can do it. Then I can refine the data by adding a requirement that the sightings must be confirmed by at least one other report. The revision to the data does not add rigor, it simply tries to increase the validity of a study invalid on its face.
If you want to defend your work, tell me how your data is scientifically valid. How is it collected? Is it done uniformly? What is the margin of error?
#25 Jeffersonian says:
There was a study that Kendall linked to a year or so back on this topic. If I remember the results correctly, the study concluded that both the most liberal and the most conservative churches tended to grow, and at fairly similar rates; churches that were more in the middle of the spectrum tended to shrink.
Does anyone remember this study and have a link to it? I could try to dig through the archives this evening and see if I can find it.
Ah, I see the BfT19 school of statistical analysis has approximated the statistics of the PB in her enumeration of leavings. Was this Course in Statistics taught at the infamous Sxhool of Theology of which the PB claimed Deanship? Was that school validated by any recognized accrediting agency? Are standard statistics to be re-written in line with the thinking of this “school” and to the defamation and overturning of the Enlightenment’s faith in numbers?
Really, BfT19, have you read your writings? I recall your shoe fittings to others in regards to statistics and here you balk at the simplest analyses applied in the standard fashion!
On the other hand, this clearly elucidates “growth” in its ECUSA/TEC/GCC/EO-PAC meaning. I believe the PB’s exact expression was vibrantly growing, wasn’t it? Where growth is taken as the change in membership REGARDLESS of direction. Your mileage may vary with reality.
[blockquote]Primary and second hand. But the issue is not falsification-it is scientific rigor. Data collection is not uniform. There are no controls and no incentives for accuracy.[/blockquote]
That’s not what you said before: [i]”Just because information is reported by TEC, doesn’t mean it is accurate. Parishes report membership also. Membership determines their Diocesan assessment. It is to a parishes advantage to underreport membership and to lower ASA figures to fit the membership numbers.”[/i]
That’s an allusion to a deliberate fraud being perpetrated on dioceses and 815. Can you support this?
Further, I don’t know what the intricacies are of counting posteriors in pews in your neck of the woods, but in ours it’s just a matter of the ushers going row to row and adding up the totals. Sure, there will be errors, but there’s no reason to believe those errors are not random and normally distributed about the mean, thus cancelling themselves out in aggregate.
Lastly, any visitors there may be will, by necessity, boost ASA. Unless you’re suggesting there are 180,000 fewer such visitors today than in 2000, I’d say there’s a pronounced decline.
I recall your shoe fittings to others in regards to statistics and here you balk at the simplest analyses applied in the standard fashion!
On the other hand, this clearly elucidates “growth†in its ECUSA/TEC/GCC/EO-PAC meaning. I believe the PB’s exact expression was vibrantly growing, wasn’t it
I don’t think you do, becayse I have been consistent and insistent on the topics of stats. As for ++Katharine, where do any of you have her quotedf as claiming that TEC is growing? Please cite the source.
Can you support this?
Yes.
I’d say there’s a pronounced decline.
Again. A very simple question. Where can you specifically cite a TEC leader saying that there has been no decline? Anyone? Where can you cite me saying that there has been no decline? Please provide verifiable sources.
[blockquote]Can you support this?[/blockquote]
I’m from Missouri…show me.
[blockquote]Again. A very simple question. Where can you specifically cite a TEC leader saying that there has been no decline? Anyone? Where can you cite me saying that there has been no decline? Please provide verifiable sources. [/blockquote]
I don’t know, and haven’t contended this.
So what are you arguing here, B? About a decimal place or two in the figures?
Hey Brian,
You’re making a bigger deal of this than I have been. I’m not claiming that TEC ASA data or membership data is wonderfully accurate or perfect. On many other threads I have complained it is not. I’ve argued on other threads that the parochial report form should be modified so that ASA data is not skewed by the stupid “Christmas effect.” There could easily be a separate box to report Christmas attendance every year, as there is a box for Easter attendance. Then the Christmas effect (when Christmas falls on a Sunday or Monday, meaning large Christmas eve services on Sat night or Sunday count in the ASA data in those years) could be precisely calculated and the data standardized. Membership data is worthless in some cases as many parishes are very slow to clean their rolls (as in the cases I’ve shown above in SE Florida where there are huge discrepancies between ASA data and membership data).
All I wanted to do was to show the magnitude of the decline with the data that exists – TEC’s own data. I’ve done that. And I’ve also tried to demonstrate why I think ASA is the more worthwhile figure to track.
As to the question of “who is saying there is no decline” I don’t believe I ever said that TEC leaders were explicitly saying that. A few like Dr. Hadaway and those that compiled the recent “State of the Church” report acknowledge there is serious systemic decline. Kudos to them for their honesty and courage to admit a very hard truth.
However, KJS is less than honest about this. I will pull some of her recent quotes and post them here in a little while. She’s not said there is “no” decline, but she very seriously downplays it, suggests it is mostly over, just a few noisy troublemakers in limited areas. I beg to differ, and I think the stats I’ve posted, especially if you look closely at the individual dioceses and the widespread decline even in dioceses where there has been little “overt conflict” over VGR etc.
That’s the sole extent of what I’m trying to do with this data. I’ll let other readers be the judge as to whether I’ve accomplished that. If you’re not convinced I really don’t care, frankly.
More info about the “State of the Church” report I mentioned in my previous comment here:
http://new.kendallharmon.net/wp-content/uploads/index.php/t19/article/21383
KJS in an interview in Oregon last week, [url=http://www.oregonlive.com/living/index.ssf/2009/06/top_episcopalian_returns_to_or.html]from here[/url]:
[blockquote]Q: Oregon seems far removed from the big Episcopal controversy over gay ordinations —
[KJS]: That’s a good thing. The controversy isn’t that big; it’s just noisy in some places.[/blockquote]
[BTW: Oregon had an ASA decline of 8.6% from 2002 – 2007, but that is actually in the top 10% for TEC, relatively good]
[url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,237417,00.html]December 2006 – interviewed after the Virginia churches voted to leave[/url]: “”This is a handful of congregations of a total of nearly 7,200, the vast majority of which are engaged in healthy and vital ministry,”
[url=http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/10/08/bishop.html?sid=101]KJS following Pittsburgh departure in Oct 2008[/url]: “I think we’re well past the worst of the crisis” (many of us actually applauded her for this statement because she actually acknowledged that a “crisis” existed – it seemed to be the first time she used the word.
There are many more quotes I could dig up, but one can see the pattern of denial.
Ross (#41), yes I think you are quite right in what you write. Several studies show that churches which have a clearly defined mission and high expectations for their members grow.
I think the document you are remembering is here:
http://ecusa.anglican.org/documents/FACTs_on_Episcopal_Church_Growth.pdf
and here:
http://ecusa.anglican.org/documents/Episcopal_Overview_FACT_2005.pdf
One more too good to pass up quote by KJS:
[blockquote]This morning, after listening to tales from over 20 dioceses of congregations splitting and foreign “incursions” (evidently the new preferred term for the formerly popular “border crossings”) around the Episcopal Church, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori made this astonishing statement:
“The conflict that you read about in the headlines is not reality for 95 percent” of the church.[/blockquote]
http://new.kendallharmon.net/wp-content/uploads/index.php/t19/article/6313
KJS’ statement that the conflict is “not a reality for 95 percent” of the church is absolutely devastatingly contradicted by the recent State of the Church report included in the Blue Book for this year’s General Convention. If you’re interested in the TEC growth/decline question and you haven’t read at least the Living Church article summarizing that report, you must.
http://www.livingchurch.org/news/news-updates/2009/3/27/report-warns-of-long-term-decline
[blockquote]More than five years later, tensions caused by the consecration of a partnered homosexual man as Bishop Coadjutor of New Hampshire [b]continue to affect half of all Episcopal churches,[/b] according to census information compiled in the Blue Book prepared for the 76th General Convention, to be held July 8-17 in Anaheim, Calif.
The report, based on results from 783 completed surveys, is a sober snapshot of an aging denomination, struggling with unresolved conflict and in danger of long-term decline. It was written by the House of Deputies Committee on the State of the Church and included in the Blue Book report published in advance of Convention.
[…] There are some indications that what the committee describes as [b]“tensions†are growing in congregations.[/b] In a similar survey undertaken [b]in 2005, 37 percent of congregations reported serious conflict that resulted in at least some members leaving.[/b] About one-third of those responding in 2005 attributed the conflict to decisions made during the 2003 General Convention. [b]In a similar survey conducted in 2008, 64 percent of congregations reported some level of conflict over the ordination of homosexual clergy, with most reporting such conflict to be serious.[/b]
“Overall, 47 percent of Episcopal congregations had serious conflict over this issue, 40 percent indicated that some people left and 18 percent indicated that some people withheld funds,†the committee report states. [b]“Furthermore, the rate of decline in Average Sunday Attendance from 2003-2007 among congregations with serious conflict over the ordination of gay clergy was 35 percent higher than congregations with no conflict over the issue (and accounted for more than double the aggregate loss).â€[/b]
[…] The ongoing tension and loss of membership has caused what the report describes as an “alarming†increase in the number of congregations reporting financial difficulty. In 2005, 44 percent of congregations reported experiencing some degree of financial difficulty. [b]By the 2008 the figure had increased to 68 percent.[/b] Only one domestic diocese, South Carolina, reported growth in active members and communicants in good standing between 2003 and 2007.[/blockquote]