# EPC, ECO, PCA membersip statistics



## Calvinbeza (Jun 6, 2015)

According to the news EPC grew by 40 congregations in 2015. The church growth slowed down.

ECO grow to 208 churches in 2015 (PC(USA) churches prefer to join ECO insted of EPC)

PCA churchrs grow by 5 to 1,499, mission churches grow by 18 to 322. membership declined by 1,300.


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Jun 6, 2015)

I'm confused, so is this showing that in growing its churches, there were more leaving the PCA then joining?


----------



## Jack K (Jun 6, 2015)

Statistically, both of those PCA numbers are pretty flat. The fact that one is a bit above zero and the other a bit below zero means little compared to the fact that both numbers are very close to zero. In that sense, the data matches. Small adjustments in membership can be explained by many things, not all having to do with people walking out the door. Perhaps some larger churches pruned their inactive members or changed their reporting (or failed to report at all).


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 6, 2015)

The number of PCA churches grew, total members slightly decreased


----------



## Edward (Jun 6, 2015)

It's my recollection that about half of the PCA churches won't report membership, so they really do need to put an asterisk by the membership numbers. 

Membership for the reporting churches is essentially flat as the denomination moves from a growth strategy to a social ministry model. 

As for losses, as Jack suggested, a large church purging its rolls can account for a loss in the current environment. It happened with Coral Ridge after Kennedy passed away, and it happened with Park Cities after Ryan. Any big churches have a transition last year?


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 6, 2015)

> Any big churches have a transition last year?


First Presbyterian Church of Jackson, MS. Ligon Duncan become president of RTS, David Strain become senior pastor


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 6, 2015)

PCA Mission to North America(MNA) published materials cited that the PCA intention to plant 400 churhces in 5 yeras, stating in 2015. This means 80 new churches per year if I count exactly. 

In 2015 the number of mission churches grew by 18. 

Could the PCA carry out to plant 80 church per year? As I mentioned there were 18 more church plant in 2015, than in 2014.


----------



## Unoriginalname (Jun 6, 2015)

Any reason on why churches don't report their numbers?


----------



## Edward (Jun 6, 2015)

Calvinbeza said:


> Could the PCA carry out to plant 80 church per year?



What is their definition of 'plant'? New works or particularized churches? Clearly they have the resources to establish that many mission works in 5 years. Are they planning to follow proven models, or are they going to concentrate on ethnic/special interest. If you figure about 3 years from start to particularization of a traditional work, and probably longer for a specialty work, It's technically possible. (There are about 300 mission works in the pipeline now, almost all of those should be particularized or failed by then. So you just need to add in about 100 new starts particularized over the 5 years to get to 400.} It isn't an outlandish number. It all depends on what the program is.


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 6, 2015)

> New works or particularized churches


In the citation there was only that the PCA want to start 400 churches in the next 5 years. New churches for the PCA, it does not really matters I think it does not really matters, that mission churches or particular churches. BOTH.


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 7, 2015)

I meant 400 new churches within 5 years


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 7, 2015)

Unoriginalname said:


> Any reason on why churches don't report there numbers?




1) Laziness

2) No one at the churches want to do it, partly out of embarrassment, partly out of not thinking it important.


In the ARP at least it takes less than 10 minutes to fill out our statistics report.


----------



## Edward (Jun 7, 2015)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> 1) Laziness
> 
> 2) No one at the churches want to do it, partly out of embarrassment, partly out of not thinking it important.



I wouldn't leave out paranoia. 'We tell them how many people we have, the next thing you know they'll be wanting us to pay per capita and telling us what to do. Better to just not get started down that road'. For those who came out of the PCUS, I'm not sure that those concerns are entirely without basis. 



Calvinbeza said:


> First Presbyterian Church of Jackson, MS. Ligon Duncan become president of RTS, David Strain become senior pastor



Thanks. Might be enough to move the needle.


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 7, 2015)

If this statisstical number are not exact and correcr, why is it published?


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 7, 2015)

I mean if only 50% of the churches repoert membership, this numbers do not represent the real strenght of the PCA. Maybe PCA membership is 300,000, or more than 400,000.
Isn't it?


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Jun 8, 2015)

Unoriginalname said:


> Any reason on why churches don't report there numbers?



Does PCA have a mandatory (or voluntary) "Per Capita" contribution?


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 8, 2015)

If this statistical numbers are not exact and correct, why is it published?


----------



## Jake (Jun 8, 2015)

Calvinbeza said:


> I mean if only 50% of the churches repoert membership, this numbers do not represent the real strenght of the PCA. Maybe PCA membership is 300,000, or more than 400,000.
> Isn't it?



For what it's worth, I heard Dr. Ligon Ducan speak last night and he estimated several times that the membership of the PCA is "near 400,000," although he didn't cite anything for that.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jun 8, 2015)

Maybe it pleases the bureaucrats. The size of the PCA (size period) is inconsequential to faithfulness.


Calvinbeza said:


> If this statistical numbers are not exact and correct, why is it published?


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 8, 2015)

> I heard Dr. Ligon Ducan speak last night and he estimated several times that the membership of the PCA is "near 400,000,"



How do he know that?

From wich statistics?


----------



## Edward (Jun 8, 2015)

GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> Does PCA have a mandatory (or voluntary) "Per Capita" contribution?



Voluntary. Looks like $103 for 2015. I thought we budgeted $99, but that may have been last year's number.

Edit to add - that is based on communing members, I believe.


----------



## Edward (Jun 8, 2015)

Calvinbeza said:


> If this statistical numbers are not exact and correct, why is it published?


It does have some utility as a year-to-year comparison. As we are doing here. 




Jake said:


> I heard Dr. Ligon Ducan speak last night and he estimated several times that the membership of the PCA is "near 400,000," although he didn't cite anything for that.


Probably in that range. He likely has a better picture of who isn't reporting and what the sizes might be. I've always assumed that it is generally the smaller churches, but I don't have a basis for that that I can recall.


----------



## yeutter (Jun 8, 2015)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Maybe it pleases the bureaucrats. The size of the PCA (size period) is inconsequential to faithfulness.


Amen. But it is noteworthy that the average Sunday attendance in the PCA is probably higher then the average Sunday attendance in the PCUSA.


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 8, 2015)

Thanks


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 9, 2015)

What do you think , causes of the PCA membership losses?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 9, 2015)

Didn't they give a few reasons above? What do you think of your Church? How is it fairing statistically? Are you guys gaining members? If so are they people coming from other congregations or are they from efforts of the congregation sowing and watering? Do they do door to door visitation or do they rely mostly upon what is called friendship evangelism? Is your Church very active in the community and is it gaining members from that effort? If you are losing members why are they leaving your congregation?


----------



## Edward (Jun 9, 2015)

Calvinbeza said:


> What do you think , causes of the PCA membership losses?



Change in MNA strategy is a factor. Build out in some of the 'easy pickings' areas. Growing hostility toward Christianity in America, and moral values in general. Economic conditions.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 9, 2015)

I believe the reason Christianity might be going down in numbers supposedly can be explained by the Parable of the Sower. It is becoming increasingly unpopular to be a biblical Christian. Culture just might be the pan that is sifting out the chaff. The true numbers of who is a Christian actually might be going up as the chaff is being sifted out also. I personally don't understand why we should concern ourselves with numbers. One sows, One waters, the Lord gives the increase. We should be concerned if we are sowing and watering correctly but I am not so sure numbers or statistics are the best way to measure these things.

Addition... I do understand that we need to know numbers so that we may be responsible for our house and how we fund things. But I am not so sure that the line of questioning here is concerned about that.


----------



## Calvinbeza (Jun 13, 2015)

why PC(USA) churches prefer ECO, not EPC? They are very liberal in theology?


----------



## Edward (Jun 13, 2015)

Calvinbeza said:


> why PC(USA) churches prefer ECO, not EPC? They are very liberal in theology?



Generally, you should think of ECO as theological liberals who are homophobic. They've gone along with all the other innovations. They use the laundry list Book of Confessions instead of Westminster or another historic confession. Ordination of women is fine. Abortion isn't really a problem. Discrete homosexual elders was even something they could probably tolerate, although a lot were uncomfortable about that. This is a single issue split. 

The EPC, on the other hand, while soft on ordination of women and speaking in tongues, and while granting a lot of congregational leeway, at least subscribes, in a broad sense, to Westminster.


----------

