# What is a "micro denomination"?



## Kevin (Feb 12, 2011)

A discussion on a recent thread prompted this question. What is a Micro-Denomination?

I always considered any group smaller then a couple of dozen congregations micro. Someone else suggested less then 50 as a standard. That made me wonder what is the standard that you all use?

My (poorly thought out) standard was less then three presbyteries would be micro. Since that would be too few to make up a synod, then it is "micro".

Anyone else have an idea? Or do you "just know one when you see it"?


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Feb 12, 2011)

Two completely subjective categories come up in my mind.

1) Vintage

2) Size

In other words I would not consider the Protestant Reformed Church or the RCUS to be "micro" even though they are small in comparison because of their age.. 

In a somewhat unrelated comment here it is often forgotten that us ARP'ers are the second-largest reformed Presbyterian body.


----------



## Skyler (Feb 12, 2011)

Kevin said:


> Anyone else have an idea? Or do you "just know one when you see it"?



I would be in the latter category. I know ideas when I see them.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 12, 2011)

The PC(USA) is now on the brink of sliding under 2M, down from their peak of 4.3+ million (when the UPCUSA) in 1967.
The PCA is closing in on 350,000
The EPC has, I think, about 80,000
The OPC and ARP are each somewhere past 30,000 [correct me here as needed!]
From there it drops precipitously. I can't think of any in the 10-25,000 range at present.
The RPCNA has about 6,000 and the BPC has maybe 3,000 members. 

Below that is the potential realm of the micro-denominations. So I would first want to define a micro-denomination as something below those last numbers--well below. So here consider the total membership and the number of churches. 

But something else might also factor in, namely, that the group would be the result of one or more schisms. Most, if not all, of these groups are consciously doctrinal, with studied convictions. Consequently, many of the small groups have rarified or even unique doctrines or convictions which prevent them from merger with other groups that are otherwise of like mind. Ask yourself why don't all of the exclusive psalmody groups merge together? (Q.: aren't most of the micro groups EP?) A joining and receiving with the RPCNA would probably be the most profitable and least troublesome. But it doesn't happen. 

That last consideration in turn reveals another likely distinguishing character of a micro-denomination, namely a single leading figure who more or less controls the whole group. To merge with others would diminish the power or control enjoyed. In some cases that power might be cultic or tyrannical, but often it is well-meaning and merely leveraged to keep things on the straight and narrow. 

So, in sum:
1. Fewer than 2,000 members
2. Fewer than 50 churches 
[if all of the churches in the group have fewer than 100 members, that might be another defining factor]
3. Doctrinal precision to the point of excluding merger with similar groups
4. A single dominant leader who may exert autocratic, cultic or even tyrannical leadership
5. Ben's note of vintage is good, but by itself not determinative. The Reformed Presbyterian Church, General Synod got down to 9 churches in the early 20th century. I would call that a micro-denom. at that point, just on the basis of size. But they built back up to about 28 churches by the time they merged with the larger portion of the BPC split to form the RPCES.


----------



## Marrow Man (Feb 12, 2011)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> In a somewhat unrelated comment here it is often forgotten that us ARP'ers are the second-largest reformed Presbyterian body.



Not any more. As Wayne points out, the EPC (because it has taken in so many defecting PC(USA) churches) is now larger.

Wayne, I think the ARP numbers are now closer to 35,000, If I recall correctly.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 12, 2011)

Thanks, Tim. Set a few more rocking chairs out on the porch at Due East.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Feb 12, 2011)

I think we still have more actual churches. The majority of the PC(USA) congregations that came in to the EPC recently were of 500-1,000 member size. There are also a much higher percentage of large congregations in the EPC.


----------



## Marrow Man (Feb 12, 2011)

Wayne said:


> Set a few more rocking chairs out on the porch at Due East.



I think you mean Due West. 

There are lots of rocking chairs at the Bonclarken retreat center, but that's in Flat Rock, NC.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 12, 2011)

Show's what I know, huh? 

mea culpa!


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Feb 12, 2011)

We definitely have by far the best Denominational meetings.

(Wow did that get off topic. )


----------



## Oecolampadius (Feb 12, 2011)

Is the term "micro denomination" sometimes used (or viewed) as a pejorative?

The reason that I'm asking this is that I have been in conversations wherein the term "micro denomination" was associated with the picture of a small group of people or churches who then decided to start a new denomination because they simply couldn't agree with the rest of their Reformed brethren despite the fact that these brethren are confessionally orthodox.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Feb 12, 2011)

Wayne,

The EPC had north of 115,000 last I heard and 300 congregations. Wiki has the ARP congregations at 200+. If true, then the EPC would be larger than the ARP in both categories.

---------- Post added at 09:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 PM ----------




Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> I think we still have more actual churches. The majority of the PC(USA) congregations that came in to the EPC recently were of 500-1,000 member size. There are also a much higher percentage of large congregations in the EPC.


 
I agree, if the numbers I have are correct, the average EPC church's membership is approx 385.


----------



## Scott1 (Feb 12, 2011)

Marrow Man said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > In a somewhat unrelated comment here it is often forgotten that us ARP'ers are the second-largest reformed Presbyterian body.
> ...


 
While this is not the topic of this thread, we might point out many of us do not consider the EPC a biblical, reformed presbyterian denomination. 

(Based on its denominational charter to self conciously place itself "in the middle" Evangelical Presbyterian Church > Frequently Asked Questions About The EPC (between reformed presbyterian and liberal mainline), it is best described as a broadly evangelical denomination. That's not at all to say there are not many believers in the denomination, or that it does not have a reformed heritage, and even local pockets of reformed influence- but that's not the same thing).

(Nor does the EPC belong to the North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council [NAPARC], and have those fraternal relations with the biblical, reformed denominations- for good reasons)

A biblical reformed presbyterian denomination means something, including being united by an essential binding confession, which the EPC has chosen not to be.

So the oldest American presbyterian denomination might well be thought of as the second largest.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Feb 12, 2011)

Oecolampadius said:


> Is the term "micro denomination" sometimes used (or viewed) as a pejorative?
> 
> The reason that I'm asking this is that I have been in conversations wherein the term "micro denomination" was associated with the picture of a small group of people or churches who then decided to start a new denomination because they simply couldn't agree with the rest of their Reformed brethren despite the fact that these brethren are confessionally orthodox.


 
I can only speak for myself, but I would have to say, "Yes."


----------



## Wayne (Feb 12, 2011)

Oecolampadius said:


> Is the term "micro denomination" sometimes used (or viewed) as a pejorative?



That brings up the good point of etimology. I think the term originated with Dr. Edwin Elliott, perhaps more or less about the time that he, Richard Bacon and others were in talks about a merger (which never quite worked out).

In short, if my account is correct, it certainly was not initially a pejorative. Others might use it that way, but that's only regrettable.


----------



## au5t1n (Feb 12, 2011)

Well, you've got to define micro-denomination as large enough to leave room for the possibility of nano, pico, and femto denominations. e.g. WPCUS is a nano-denomination, a house church is a pico-denomination, and a femto-denomination is a lone evangelical and his Bible.


----------



## Marrow Man (Feb 12, 2011)

Micro-denomination does not have to be any more pejorative than micro-brewery. In fact, if micro-denominations would make better use of the similarity in name to micro-breweries, then they would no longer be micro.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 12, 2011)

But wouldn't you agree that most of the micro-denominations are of the *stout* category. Some might even be termed _Russian Imperial Stouts_


----------



## Steve Curtis (Feb 12, 2011)

Scott1 said:


> While this is not the topic of this thread, we might point out many of us do not consider the EPC a biblical, reformed presbyterian denomination.
> 
> (Based on its denominational charter to self conciously place itself "in the middle" Evangelical Presbyterian Church > Frequently Asked Questions About The EPC (between reformed presbyterian and liberal mainline), it is best described as a broadly evangelical denomination.



I only respond to this because it always comes up whenever the EPC is mentioned in any thread. From the same website:

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a confessional statement of orthodox Presbyterianism. The Westminster Confession of Faith is our standard of doctrine as found in Scripture. It is a positive statement of the Reformed Faith. The Westminster Confession of Faith constitutes a system of biblical truth that an officer of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church is required to believe, acknowledging that each individual court has the freedom to allow exceptions which do not infringe upon the system of doctrine in the Westminster Confession of Faith. 
Evangelical Presbyterian Church > Essentials of Our Faith

While there are certainly some ministers within the EPC who are not confessional in practice, they are supposed to be (and declare themselves to be in their examinations), according to the requirements of EPC officers.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 12, 2011)

Thank you, Steve. We will agree to let that comment close that matter on this thread. Any further discussion of the EPC would be off-topic for this thread.


----------



## Phil D. (Feb 12, 2011)

Kevin said:


> What is a Micro-Denomination?



Any one that happens to be smaller than whatever one I happen to be in...


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 12, 2011)

Wayne is correct; the term as I recall when it first came about as he noted, was simply descriptive, not pejorative.


----------



## Edward (Feb 12, 2011)

Wayne said:


> So, in sum:
> 1. Fewer than 2,000 members
> 2. Fewer than 50 churches
> [if all of the churches in the group have fewer than 100 members, that might be another defining factor]
> 3. Doctrinal precision to the point of excluding merger with similar groups



I'd agree with those 3. 



Wayne said:


> 4. A single dominant leader who may exert autocratic, cultic or even tyrannical leadership



And I don't personally disagree with that point, either. But if that is included, I would think that the definition would not be consistent with:



Wayne said:


> it certainly was not initially a pejorative. Others might use it that way, but that's only regrettable.



Since I'd think that those leadership characteristics would indicate an organization earning a pejorative label. 



Wayne said:


> 5. Ben's note of vintage is good, but by itself not determinative.



I agree that it is not determinative, but I'm not sure that I'd even consider it relevant.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 12, 2011)

Good interaction, Edward.

I would offer this refinement: 

Certainly not every small group or denomination is characterized by having autocratic leadership, but every group that does have autocratic leadership is going to tend to stay small. Any group that encourages the growth and development of leadership across the board is setting the table for future growth.


----------



## sdesocio (Feb 12, 2011)

I define a micro-denomination in my head as any denomination who breaks off from a NAPARC Denom because they are too liberal =)


----------



## N. Eshelman (Feb 13, 2011)

sdesocio said:


> I define a micro-denomination in my head as any denomination who breaks off from a NAPARC Denom because they are too liberal =)



Love it! 

I actually define micro-Presbyterians in a pejorative sense too. I think of people like the Presbyterian Reformed Church or the Heritage Reformed Church and I don't think of them as micro (even though they are by obvious standards). But when I think of ___insert name of whichever micro Presbyterian church you don't like___ , I always think micro, schismatic, sectarian. 

Maybe I should work on that.


----------



## Wayne (Feb 13, 2011)

Nathan:

Has the RPCNA ever approached any of these small groups (those that are EP) with offers to be received into the RPCNA? 

What I have in mind would be comparable to the 1982 Joining & Receiving where the RPCES merged into the PCA. In that
model, the RPCES churches simply adopted the PCA constitution in toto. There was no creation of new constitutional standards.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Feb 13, 2011)

Wayne said:


> Nathan:
> 
> Has the RPCNA ever approached any of these small groups (those that are EP) with offers to be received into the RPCNA?
> 
> ...


 
Wayne, we brought in the APC in the 1960s, but this was the last denomination that we brought in (which means that there are actually two sets of ARPs in North America). They adopted our Constitution, took our name, etc. I believe there were 4 congregations left at that time. 

There is a micro-presbytery in Minn or Wisconsin that is talking with one of our presbyteries about coming in with them. I do not know the full extent of it. 

For the most part, the RPCNA is viewed as a bastard child by many of the micro-Presbyterians. We have our issues, for sure, and since we are not perfect on paper- some of the micros see us as psalm singing liberals or psalm singing evangelicals at best. (At least this is some of what I have heard from some). Discontents do not generally like the RP Church.  

We would be open to taking in the smaller of the smallest... since we are the smallest of the biggest. (6700 members)


----------



## Marrow Man (Feb 13, 2011)

nleshelman said:


> For the most part, the RPCNA is viewed as a bastard child by many of the micro-Presbyterians. We have our issues, for sure, and since we are not perfect on paper- some of the micros see us as psalm singing liberals or psalm singing evangelicals at best. (At least this is some of what I have heard from some). Discontents do not generally like the RP Church.



Really? The RPCNA is "liberal"? It reminds me of something a seminary professor used to say: everybody is somebody's liberal.

For what it's worth, I long for the day when the ARP and the RPCNA can join together in some capacity. Yes, I know the distinctive that would be required for that to happen, but I for one would happy to embrace our psalm-singing heritage again.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Feb 13, 2011)

Marrow Man said:


> nleshelman said:
> 
> 
> > For the most part, the RPCNA is viewed as a bastard child by many of the micro-Presbyterians. We have our issues, for sure, and since we are not perfect on paper- some of the micros see us as psalm singing liberals or psalm singing evangelicals at best. (At least this is some of what I have heard from some). Discontents do not generally like the RP Church.
> ...



I look forward to that too, Tim. We seceders need to keep together.


----------



## Marrow Man (Feb 13, 2011)

nleshelman said:


> I look forward to that too, Tim. We seceders need to keep together.



Like I always say, if at first you don't secede ...


----------

