As a 29 year old, one thing that stuck out at me was the lack of persons my age in the Episcopal church compared to the general population. This is something I noticed as an Episcopalian (the lack of young adults/families), but to see it in statistical form highlights the failure of ECUSA to appeal to a younger demographic. It is funny, because when I was in an Episcopal seminary in 2003, an older priest approached me, and assumed because of my youth I was pretty liberal, and into the writings of Spong. I told him definitely not. I thought to myself, “that is YOUR generation, not mine.” I thought “is it any wonder a church whose theology is stuck in the 60s and 70s can’t get young people?”

Descriptors which Episcopal rectors and vicars
say fit them least well were charismatic leader
(lowest), evangelistic, effective administrator,
“knows how to get people to work together,”
and “knows how to get things done.”

And before anybody goes off on a sreed about how it’s all the clergy’s fault, these are the people that lay people have been endorsing and sending forward for decades.

I was struck by the first pie graph - look how few churches have been established in recent years.

Kendall, as you well know, we are WAY past the point of needing to ask, for the answer has long since been apparent…..

I am also 29.  Our parish (the only Network one in MN) is chock full of young families.  My wife and I are on the young side even then but we actually have very few of the old school generation.

The saddest “fact” (to me) was that only 51% of congregations have children’s programs!  No wonder we are not growing!  Families are not going to go where their children are not welcome or planned for.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

Everything’s fine! TEC is vital and healthy!

“That’s one of the great joys I’ve had in my first six months, getting to travel and see the health and vitality that exists in this church,’’ she [Schori] told a crowd of about 300 at Christ Episcopal Church, 220 40th St. NE. “I know it’s not always what you read in the newspaper or hear on the news, but it’s true.’’
      link

#6,
Good point. If you don’t have children’s programs you aren’t going to get young parents, I can tell you that. Of course, I didn’t much care for the Sunday School curriculum I used at my last parish. I can’t recall its name (it was 2002), but it seemed to me to be pretty political, and leftward at that. I think it was for 5th graders. I finally just chucked the book after they spent a whole unambiguous lesson on the evils of gun control, when the section on Jesus was very ambiguous.

My sentence in the last response should read.”...after they spent a whole unambiguous lesson on the evils of gun ownership…”. They were unambiguous in their praise of gun control.

The Silver Lining: The number of young ones falling into the destructive apostate hands and teachings of EcUSA/TEc continues to shrink.  Praise God!!

As things currently stand, I will not take my worst enemy to join the membership of an Episcopal cult (save for a few real Churches in yet a fewer dioceses). I wish my enemies better!

However, another notable point is in the final bullet point on Pg. 4:

“Predominantly liberal and somewhat liberal churches are somewhat more likely to have experienced growth during the last five years than more conservative congregations.”

And also, from the beginning of that page:

Desire for growth in membership and attendance is the top pick in terms of 12 characteristics that were posed to Episcopal congregations.  Working for social justice and being able to change to meet new challenges were selected by the fewest congregations.  Ironically, churches that change in order to meet new challenges are much more likely to grow than churches that simply desire to grow.”

Any comments on these?

#3, Sherri, why start new churches when you are closing old ones?

It’s a remarkably frank report.  I work with this kind of data all the time and if the “management” at TEC cannot see that there are very serious problems in both the short- and long-terms then they never will.  What struck me was the lack of giving to seminaries but the lack of giving in general.  Only 7% donating .7 percent, my we probably give that much in a year.  I am struck by the same demographic facts when I head home to the Midwest and return to the “old parish”...which is for the most part an “old parish” in every sense of the word.  There was a remarkable lack of spin throughout the document as well. 

As for church planting the The Falls Church CANA was asked NOT to plant churches in the past by the Diocese of VA because “there were so many other Episcopal Churches in the area”.  I now drive by more than one which is closed and sold to some other group.  But I have to say,“What kind of church discourages church planting?”.  On the other hand, word is that in Nigeria a church really isn’t to have considered as having matured until it’s planted a new church.  I guess that makes most TEC churches immature by CANA standards.

dcs, the data from the report seems fairly clear, I think.

—The number of predominantly conservative churches in ECUSA is more than double the number of predominantly liberal churches: 18% to 8%.

—“Conservative episcopal congregations were much more likely to have experienced very serious conflict during the last five years than moderate or liberal congregations.”

—48% of Episcopal congregations experienced moderate to very serious conflict over GC 2003.

I can understand why conservative congregations, in such a context, would lose parishioners while floods and floods of liberals would then enter the liberal parishes.

Liberals represent 8 +22 %:conservative 18 +26%: moderates were 27%.  How did the liberals take over the whole church?  How can the liberals claim they are the majority?  why wouldn’t the leadership want to “tolerate” and work to address the concerns of at least 44% of its membership.  I think TEC has become a model for communism.

KJS has described the conservatives as a really tiny (eensy-weensy) noisy minority. There has been real attempt to survey the individual parishioners since the 1980’s. There was an attempt that was quashed by Griswold in the late 90’s. If one looks at figure 13, one finds that 43% of parishes are described as somewhat to predominantly conservative. This is in contrast to 30% liberal parishes. 27% are in the middle. Or in other words 50% more conservative parishes than liberal ones. This lends credence to my contention that there are more conservative Episcopalians than liberal ones. Any comfort here. Not really. There is another new document from the TEc’s statistician found here. One finds in figure 7, that the most conservative churches are the least likely to grow. He does note that in conservative dioceses the relationships are reversed, a conservative church in a conservative diocese is more likely to grow than a moderate one.

The lack of children’s programs is a problem, but many parishes are stuck in a downward spiral.  The median ASA is down to 75 and only 15% of parishoners are in the 0-15 age range.  That leaves a whopping 10 children regularly attending at our median parish.  Assuming that some of those children would be too young for a children’s program (the 0-2 year range) and now you’re down to about 8 potential children, age 3-15. Obviously not having a children’s program at all isn’t a good way of turning around the trend, but in many parishes there is such a continual drain of people leaving, those who would lead or teach in a children’s program, and often those with children (consider what happens to a parish with 8 children in the ASA when a family with 2 or 3 childen leave) that it becomes harder and harder to sustain any meaningful program.  It might not be the lack of a children’s program that is driving the people away, but there reaches a point where no one wants to put forth the effort of developing and staffing a program when there are almost no children left.
This of course holds true for all manner of other programs as well.  It often takes a critical mass to be successful, and I don’t think 75 ASA is usually going to cut it. 

In looking at the statistics, the average Episcopalian seems to be an elderly white lady.  Not that there’s anything wrong with being elderly, white, or female, but I don’t know a lot of elderly people with young children.
Still there are some parishes that are thriving or at least maintaining if not growing.  But the majority seem to be in trouble, and the leadership in TEC seem not to notice and are doing more to speed the decline than anything else.

I couldn’t get over how white the church is.

I am an oddity.  I grew up (confirmed in) in my current church.  I was married in the same church.  All three of my boys were baptized in the same church.  I was drawn back by family roots.  Luckily, we have recently brought in a new rector in who is a true leader.  Last month we hired a full-time Youth Leader.  I am 42 now. I am hoping we can begin to draw more young families in with meaningful, targeted youth programs.

Looks like demography is doing for Tec what Mark Steyn say it’s doing for old Europe - pushing it to enfeeblement and death. The cultural parallels could be drawn in many other ways (anti-natalist secularism, embrace of homosexuality etc),

“More than half of Episcopal parishes and missions
(60%) offer two or more services on the weekend.”

Paradoxically, the implication that the services are offered to people may be the fundamental problem.

#14 said:

I can understand why conservative congregations, in such a context, would lose parishioners while floods and floods of liberals would then enter the liberal parishes.

Those floods and floods of liberals sure don’t seem to be showing up on the statistics.

I am in a very liberal diocese that is declining in membership and in children.  I am a part time rector in a relatively conservative congregation, and my congregation is the fastest growing congregation of all the small churches in the Diocese.  Why would that be?  It is very simple, I preach the Gospel, heal the sick, and cast out demons.  Wierd, I have to admit, but it is this old fashionedness that I was taught in Seminary, and for some strange reason, it works.

Well, Br’er Rabbit, I was referring to this statement in a comment above: “Predominantly liberal and somewhat liberal churches are somewhat more likely to have experienced growth during the last five years than more conservative congregations.”

As to what “somewhat more likely” means or what “growth” means I do not know.

Something may even be the “fastest growing”—that is, a gain from 1 to 2 units—and that means “100% growth”—but still be very small.  But we simply don’t know from the report.

However, even if the “somewhat liberal” parishes are growing in significant numbers I think that that is explained by the quotes from the overview that I posted above.

The Episcopal church is, by and large, a denomination that is now for radical progressives.  That is the identity that the national leadership has chosen.

Conservative parishes—particularly those in moderate to liberal dioceses—are slowly recognizing that, and the decline, I believe, will generally continue.

115,000 people lost, as I recall—NET loss—over the past three years.  It appears unlikely that the churches that are “somewhat more likely to have experienced growth” will make up for that loss.

I presume this report includes data from the TEC parishes that have since departed—Christ Church Plano, Overland Park, Newport Beach, and the CANA parishes in Virginia and Colorado.  I presume that removing their data would have a material impact on some of the reported figures, especially where parishes with ASA of 350 and higher are singled out.  Indeed, taking them out probably makes the report look worse except in the conflict category.

“I couldn’t get over how white the church is.”

Despite the frequent use of the word “diversity,” the Episcopal church isn’t very diverse at all. In fact, you will see FAR more racial, economic, and educational diversity at your local non-denom church or Catholic parish. Let’s face it, “diversity” when used in ECUSA is about sexual openness.

The difference between what TEC leadership says - ‘healthy, vibrant congregations’ - and what the data trends reveal shows that there is ineffective, negligent leadership.  Time and clear trends are against this organization.  If a corporation claims to be healthy but has declining EPS or dividend quarter after quarter, the board asks for the CEO’s resignation.  The board doesn’t wait 10 years to see if things will sort themselves out.  If a non-profit claims to be healthy but has declining membership or donations year-over-year, and is perceived as being irrelevant to potential membership, the board asks for the lead executive’s resignation.  The board doesn’t wait 10 years for membership or finances to turn around.  So here’s the problem:  who will ask for the presiding bishops’ (CEO’s) resignation?  Kind of tough to do when the board and the CEO are all living in the same fantasy world.  This is not a healthy organization by any standards.

#23, Rev. J., I for one am thrilled to hear that you are preaching the gospel, healing the sick and casting out demons all in the name of Jesus Christ! God be praised! The only thing I am surprised at is that you learned this at seminary—was it an Episcopal seminary?!
God is with you, you are a priest in the house of Our Lord. If the denomination leaves you, please speak with someone in the Orthodox Church, thank you!

Let’s face it, “diversity” when used in ECUSA is about sexual openness.

Yes, and I think it comes to us at the cost of other diversities, which, presumably are not regarded as important, especially racial diversity. At least, that has been the affect on my church.

ChristopherLambart—You mentioned elsewhere that you were at the Upper SC convention when Bill Carroll said what he said in the way that he said it (edited). Were you also at the last one at Christ Church when the Canon to the Ordinary presented parts of this report, but totally skipped the 48% of congregations experiencing moderate or very serious conflict over the 2003 General Convention (p.3)? His graphic for this did not include this bar. Is the flock being kept peacefully in the dark? Sleep sheep sleep.

I learned in my statistics classes that one can read figures in a variety of ways; I also learned that statistics can be made to “say” many things through subtle manipulations of the way data are grouped and reported. Thus, I am always wary of looking only at the end result, rather than the method and raw numbers.

This report suggest to me that the Episcopal Church has been working for years to “cut off the roots.” It’s intake/evangelism method has not included a replacement of current members from within the membership (see the PB’s insights into that), meaning the loss one of the key foundation-stones of a viable future (see the Shakers for more on this). Then comes a gradual re-formulation of the Anglican Tradition and message in TEC over the years, moving from one sense of itself to another (the replacement often being at odds with the original), followed by a move to internecine conflict as a primary “public face.” Not a pretty picture.

I think about this in relationship to the joy, glory, holiness, and call to godly living I knew in my home parish. The liberal-conservative paradigm is simply not good enough, rich enough, deep enough for the future. The Church must enter into the mystery of Christ, not the shallowness of humanity. When it chooses the former over the latter, it will then be able to be what God wills it to be. I personally believe this will only be possible (if at all) for TEC when, like a dissolute heir to a fortune spending beyond his means, the money is gone. Perhaps in the cold light of institutional collapse (financial exhaustion) God, through the Remnant, will be able to reassert Himself, as in Israel of old. Time will tell.

Bull Street—I wuz there too!—(Hey, are you in Columbia too??  I wish that there were a way we could contact each other and find out what church you’re attending.)

I noticed that.  Couldn’t believe that he would totally skip over Kirk Hadaway’s graph and research about the huge percentage of churches that had experienced conflict concerning the 2003 General Convention!  I heard several others talking about this too at the meeting.  He just totally skipped it—didn’t even mention it—like the General Convention never happened.

On second thought—yes I can believe that he would skip over that part and focus on the much smaller conflict experienced by “disagreement with rector”. 

But I’m not sure that the USC sheep were sleeping.  I guess Clevenger had to count on folks who were there not noticing or reading the Hadaway report that was in the packet.

That’s the great thing about Father Harmon’s blog—thanks to this place I can see this kind of thing for myself and not have to rely on propaganda from our betters.

The other nice thing is that just across the Columbia diocesan border are some mighty fine parishes.  I keep thinking about that when I think about some other further disaster happening or the direction of the diocese.  But I don’t know how many other folks are thinking that way . . .

Hard for me to believe that God will Bless a church that purposefully speaks against His Word.

bl

Dave C. nailed to a T the situation with my church in SE Florida with what he wrote in #17.

It might not be the lack of a children’s program that is driving the people away, but there reaches a point where no one wants to put forth the effort of developing and staffing a program when there are almost no children left.
This of course holds true for all manner of other programs as well.  It often takes a critical mass to be successful, and I don’t think 75 ASA is usually going to cut it.

BINGO.  We used to have an ASA of about 230 when I first started attending there in 1999-2000.  New parish hall.  New Youth building.  Separate Sunday School building.  Halfway decent youth & children’s programs. 

For reasons I don’t entirely understand and won’t go into here (and most of the problems I think actually were not much related to GC2003 and the broader ECUSA - Anglican conflict) we’ve since had precipitous member loss.  ASA is now about 100 split between 3 services (another long story), and may be somewhat less many weeks.
Basically there is no longer a Sunday School or youth program.  So, even though there is a solid core of “I won’t leave until I die or they drag me out” parishoners who want to rebuild attendance and see growth & reviatlization, many of them are quite elderly.  I think we are below critical mass in many areas. 

During my recent home leave, I worshipped at that church on 4 Sundays.  The first Sunday there was a family visiting.  They didn’t come back.  And in the church discussion meetings I attended where folks were brainstorming what to do, the question of what to do about Sunday school & Youth programs kept emerging.  At some point it becomes a viscious cycle:  Declining attendance = no Sunday School.  No Sunday School = no way to attract and keep visiting families.  What does a parish like that do?  It was very sad to see.

re: comment #30—Bull Street it may be possible for you and Christopher Lambart to get in touch.  Depending on your profile settings, you can exchange private e-mail messages with other registered users.
Go here to see your settings.
http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/member/edit_email/

Also, as over on the old version of T19, we elves are very happy to help commenters get in touch with one another.  If you’re willing for us to share your e-mail address with another commenter whom you want to contact, e-mail us:  .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

#5: Why is it that your parish has so many young people? Is it an accident of demography? Are cultural conditions in you locality particularly favorable? Has you church undertaken some course which has had this result? I aam very anxious to hear more about your situation.  LM

Our vestry has debated the absence of young couples, esp with childen, often. Our consensus is that the church offers them nothing they have any need of. (I’m in central Maine) The ethos of harassment - Are you too fat? Are you too thin? Do you use your seat belt? Do you mind having a porn shop legally in your neighborhood? Are their sexual predators living on your street? Do you hate Bush sufficiently? Would you answer this poll? How can I keep phone-peddlers away? Will you be able to pay for your childrens’ college? Your retirement is insufficient? Have you failed to pay your credit card this month? 

  These things pile up in ways that are impossible to quantify, but their upshot is to isolate young families who live best when the moat is full and the drawbridge up. Why should they come out to church? To be told they are sinners? To be told to love their enemies when they are surrounded by them and wish them in hell? What, love your credit card company? To be told that the meek will inherit the earth when they themselves, were they meek and mild, would be on the street looking for a shelter. They’re in the middle of a war, and the church wants them to be pacific and love their neighbor whose parties go on all night? Is God going to help them pay their bills or care for their aging and infirm parents? He has a job and she has two part time jobs, and they’re going to use Sunday for church?  The problem for the young couple is simple: What good will the church do them? It will take their money and use up Sunday. Who can tell them otherwise? Why should they listen? LM

ChristopherLambart—I’d be glad to correspond, but I took off from Bull Street this afternoon for the holiday. I’ll contact the elves when I get back. Keep the faith.

Readers outside SC may not catch the humor in “took off from Bull Street.” “Bull Street” was once synonymous with the SC Lunatic Asylum (now closed for redevelopment).

Steven in #25, this data in collected as of 2005.  It does not include any data from 2006 or 2007.  So there are a number of parishes who have departed who are still in these figures, and it is sometimes the case that dioceses leave parishes who have indeed left on the book for some time.

You go #23, Rev. J.!

#37
So you think that it’s not just down to the corroding effects of ‘liberalism’? I agree with you. Often enough on T19 the stats. for some impeccably conservative outfit emerge and they don’t look very spectacular. Running a mainstream church in the secularised West these days is awfully hard. I think the whole business of ‘church’ has to be ‘sold’ on a whole range of things. It’s true, of course, that as people get older they often find a need for church that they didn’t previously know they had (happened to me). In that sense, statistics about ageing church-goers are not as bad as they seem.

John: No,you’re wuite right, it’s not just liberalism in any of the usual senses. Rather, the young family is fighting an upbringing that has taught them the uselessness of self restraint, while they live in a society that is as corrosive of individual and familial integrity as any that I have ever examined. Because they were taught to make public spectacles of themselves as a means for corroborating their existence - see facebook and its ilk - they built a door that opens both ways: Nothing can stop the attack of commercial and agenda-driven enterprises from knocking and getting a jackboot in their psycho-social door. The homosexual agenda is merely one of the armies. We are all under assault from every conceivable direction, and it is 24/7.
 
How can the church “sell” itself without breaching its integrity? More upscale and trendy activities is more corrosion. The church must show that it is a safe haven of quietness, that it has a moat that nothing and no one can breach. And this is the hardest sell, because the very people who are most under attack are those who have sanctioned it and helped create it; they do not even know what it is they need most. Their disease is endogamous, systemic. Our church must be patient, keep its sweet and musical silence;  the wolves will at last drive all those who are hunted to the only sanctuary left.

Larry,
Thanks you for your reply. I’m glad (and not surprised) we agree on some things. Was it you who contributed to the mammoth ‘justification’ thread? In my ignorance of church history, I’d never heard Luther’s ‘simul iustus et peccator’. Fantastic phrase which has been in my mind ever since.

John , I do not recall simul iustus et peccator. Does his mean Both just and sinful? Please explain.I assure you that my ignorance of church history exceeds yours as poison ivy exceeds dandelion. LM

‘Simultaneously just [justified] and a sinner’. It’s Luther’s gloss on ‘justification by faith’ (or so I learned from that discussion).

When I spoke of ‘selling church’, I didn’t mean by (what I would regard as) meretricious means. I just don’t think most of the C of E clergy make enough effort, not at least in ways that are likely to be productive. Of course, in some respects it’s easier in England, dire as the situation is, because being the established church confers certain advantages, and if people after a certain age start thinking they might start going to church then a C of E church is, as likely as not, the one they might plump for. There’s also a sort of residual affection for the C of E in British society at large. So even still and despite the greater secularisation of British society, it’s not nearly as minority as TEC within the States.

KJS has said that the laity of the TEC is smarter than Catholics, etc. (Sorry Arthur, her words not mine.) Then she turns around a makes ludicrous statements like the church is healthy and happy. Why does she take us for fools?

Father Radner called the return of the church to a place of trust. What would happen if KJS said, “All is not well.” Yeah, I know…Ain’t gonna happen.

One measure of how bad things are is the lack of confidence in TEC’s bishops.  Bishop such as Jack Iker and Bob Duncan are not shown respect by reappaisers, and revisionist bishops have lost the respect of reaffirmers.