By Jeremy Bonner and David Goodhew
This article is an update of our earlier post, “The Growth of the Anglican Church in North America.”
The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) grew markedly in the years after its foundation in 2009. But the latest available figures show it has experienced decline as well as growth, depending on where you look. These new figures give a more textured picture of the nature of ACNA. They offer lessons for ACNA, but also for all Anglicans in North America.
Division and Decline
At first glance, ACNA’s latest numbers, for 2019, look concerning.
2018 2019
ACNA Membership 133,279 127,624
ACNA Attendance 87,319 84,310[i]
But they should not be taken purely at face value. The principal reason for the drop is the departure of two Nigerian-based dioceses, resulting in a loss of 5,857 members of ACNA (or 3,568 people in terms of attendance). If measured by its other dioceses, ACNA grew slightly, 2018-19. The departing dioceses have chosen to remain in the Church of Nigeria, although they retain links with ACNA. Such a division represents in microcosm the ecclesial dangers that ACNA has faced from its birth in managing divisions over ecclesiology, missionary strategy, and culture in the context of a church that has emphasized its confederal character.
This explains the rueful comment of Archbishop Foley Beach in his address to the 2021 College of Bishops:
We are beginning to suffer from a serious lack of theological, Biblical, and historical understanding in the Church . . . The mentality which writes people off and breaks fellowship with those who disagree is creeping its way into the Church. We must fight to maintain the unity of the Spirit in our Church.
Ex-Episcopal Dioceses Decline
The departure of the Nigerian-based dioceses accounts for the overall decline, but there is significant decline elsewhere in ACNA. And as we drill into the figures, it becomes clear that different dioceses are faring very differently. The divide centers on the contrasting trajectories of ACNA dioceses that moved en masse from the Episcopal Church (TEC), compared to those of new dioceses founded after the creation of ACNA.
In order to compare like with like, Table 1 provides a summary that excludes those with singular historical roots (the Reformed Episcopal Church dioceses), those outside the United States (the Anglican Network in Canada) and groups that joined ACNA after 2013 or left before 2019 (the Diocese of South Carolina, Anglican Diocese of the Trinity and CANA West).
As far as official membership rosters are concerned, overall growth over the past six years ran at approximately 0.2 percent per year, with a slight dip in the last two years. The figures for average principal worship service attendance (preferred to average Sunday attendance because many ACNA congregations hold their main services at some other time) show growth in the order of 2.2 percent per year, with little slackening between 2017 and 2019.
The contrast between “old” and “new” churches is greatly accentuated, however, if figures for the four dioceses who originally left TEC are removed. In this case, membership growth is revealed to be a most respectable 1.8 percent per year and average principal worship service attendance a remarkable 3.9 percent per year. If ACNA is experiencing a decrease in momentum, this cannot be blamed on the newly planted congregations.
TABLE 1: Changes in membership and principal service attendance 2013-2019
| ACNA membership | ACNA membership less the original TEC dioceses | ACNA
average principal service attendance |
ACNA
average principal service attendance less the original TEC dioceses |
|
| 2013* | 98,126 | 70,104 | 62,207 | 47,381 |
| 2017** | 99,732 | 74,871 | 69,840 | 55,638 |
| 2019** | 99,598 | 77,971 | 70,496 | 58,482 |
* Excludes the REC Dioceses, Anglican Network in Canada, Anglican Diocese of the Trinity and CANA West
** Excludes Diocese of South Carolina, the REC Dioceses, Anglican Network in Canada, Anglican Diocese of the Trinity and CANA West
Further illustration of the problem of the TEC legacy can be found in Table 2, where the condition of those dioceses is considered. Aside from the relative success of the Diocese of Quincy (possibly due to the absorption of a number of successful church plants in the Midwest), ex-TEC dioceses in ACNA have significantly shrunk. Neither the Anglo-Catholic tradition of Fort Worth and San Joaquin nor the Evangelical heritage of Pittsburgh appear adequate to holding the line (never mind building upon it) in the post-Christendom age.
TABLE 2: Changes in membership and principal service attendance in former TEC dioceses 2013-2019
| Members 2013 | Members 2019 | Average principal service attendance 2013 | Average principal service attendance 2019 | |
| Quincy | 1,979 | 1,956 | 763 | 1,235 |
| San Joaquin | 5,543 | 3,172 | 3,151 | 1,662 |
| Pittsburgh | 8,742 | 6,933 | 5,608 | 4,333 |
| Fort Worth | 11,758 | 9,566 | 5,304 | 4,784 |
To confirm the causes of the decline of the ex-TEC dioceses needs more research. It likely is due to a combination of (a) the fact that most TEC parishes were on a downward trajectory well before the split-off, and this has proved hard to arrest; (b) when these parishes left TEC they also left the umbrella of a large denominational apparatus and were more vulnerable within the more limited infrastructure offered by ACNA; and (c) drawn-out litigation. Pittsburgh, San Joaquim and Fort Worth have had highly damaging legal battles with TEC, some of which are ongoing. It may not be coincidental that Quincy, which has a healthier growth trend is also different from the other dioceses in having won its lawsuit.
The fate of the ex-TEC dioceses raises questions for those who share many of ACNA’s theological instincts, but have chosen to remain within TEC, most notably the Communion Partners. Likewise, those in the Church of England, facing a central church now leaning towards the liberal ethical stance of TEC, have much to ponder as they seek to chart their future course of action.
Growth, in Parts
But ACNA has seen significant growth as well as decline. Leaving aside the two Nigerian dioceses that have left ACNA, the number of congregations in the rest of ACNA continues steadily to increase. Its stress on church planting is bearing considerable fruit and is much more vigorous than that of TEC.
What is particularly telling is the success of the non-territorial jurisdictions, particularly the diocese named C4SO (Churches for the Sake of Others), whose membership doubled and principal service attendance tripled over the six years up to 2019. C4SO is now the second-largest diocese in ACNA, eclipsed only by South Carolina, larger than Fort Worth or Pittsburgh. Western dioceses like Cascadia and the Rocky Mountains also report significant increases in membership and attendance.
C4SO 2013 2019
Congregations 26 52
Members 5,325 10,493
Attendance 3,157 9,373
Members of TEC may be tempted to look askance at a diocese whose name sounds like a droid from Star Wars, but humility is in order. The growth of C4SO massively outpaces all TEC dioceses in the same period.
What Is Going On in ACNA?
Now past its first decade, ACNA is declining and growing.
The experiment with Nigerian-based dioceses has proven more uneasy than might have been expected, but ACNA’s connections with the rapidly growing African diaspora communities in the USA are far stronger than those of TEC.
The trajectory of the dioceses which left TEC en masse is striking. They have not declined more than those which remained in TEC, but they have not done appreciably better. Clearly the dynamics with which they struggled prior to leaving TEC accompanied them after their transition.
However, the dynamism of some of ACNA’s new dioceses is no less worthy of attention. They stand out not only within ACNA but also in comparison with TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada. They are the most dynamic Anglican dioceses in North America, by some distance. Indeed, across Anglicanism in the western world these dioceses stand out.
Given the mixed fortunes of both TEC and ACNA and the huge challenges presented by COVID-19, there would be much value in both churches pondering further what ACNA data signifies. We hope to dig into this material in a future article.
Dr. Jeremy Bonner is honorary fellow of the Department of Theology and Religion at Durham University. With Professor Mark Chapman he recently edited: Costly Communion: Ecumenical Initiative and Sacramental Strife in the Anglican Communion (Brill 2019).
The Rev. Dr. David Goodhew is Vicar of St Barnabas, Middlesbrough and Visiting Fellow of St. John’s College, Durham University. He is co-director of the Centre for Church Growth Research and tweets at @CCGR_Durham.
[i] ACNA’s churches mostly serve the USA, but these figures also include 91 congregations (about 10% of its congregations) which are outside the USA, mostly in Canada.
A very interesting article, thank you for this.
Now that the Forth Worth case is settled do y’all think the diocese will be able to return to growth or at least stability?
While I’m sure that an end to the legal distractions won’t be a bad thing, I would hesitate to predict substantive growth for Fort Worth. From 2017 to 2019 its diocesan profile best resembled that of Pittsburgh, both in terms of membership (-10.3% to Pittsburgh’s -10.2%) and principal service attendance (-11.0% to Pittsburgh’s -10.5%). Contrast that with the figures for C4SO for the same period of +17.2% in membership and +25.5% in principal service attendance. It’s also worth noting that other ‘new’ dioceses below the Mason-Dixon line (notably the South and the Carolinas) are posting noteworthy gains. More detailed research is needed on why the disparities reported in Table 1 have occurred.
The Foley Beach quote is just fantastic. Irony is generally lost on those who need it most, because irony is so very, very meta.
The odd thing about the ACNA is that its dioceses are not necessarily geographical. So, it might be that some of the growth involved is due to shifting/expanding geographical borders. If we were correlate geographical spread with numerical size, or, if we divided numerical size by geographical spread, we might find that “size” and “growth” are remarkably relative terms.
At least ideally, geographic dioceses aim for for what I’ll call density. That is, a geographical diocese should aim not just to create converts or sustain local parishes and those within them, but to build community across congregations with a shared faith. Part of what this means is that a geographical diocese’s wellbeing will be intimately bound to a region’s wellbeing. TEC, for example, has all but officially abandoned rural parishes, thus leaving it a largely urban church – and urban America is growing while rural America is declining. Rural parishes are sometimes heavily involved in their local community, but it’s a losing battle, because those same parishes cannot extricate themselves from the rural decline all around them. However, part of what this means is that a rural parish might have far higher density than an urban parish, even if the rural parish is smaller – and this because the total rural population is so much smaller, while the total urban population is so much bigger.
But what do non-geographical dioceses aim for? C4SO can’t strive for diocesan density because its borders are effectively non-existent, with churches in the south, midwest, California, and Hawaii. Frankly, C4SO looks not like a diocese but a denomination. Most young denominations grow at the expense of other denominations, and consequently – because the competition among young churches is perpetual – are likely to go bust within a generation. So, is the ACNA better studied as a single church or as a collection of denominations? The latter makes more sense given its confederal organization (I’ll not use the word “structure”).
The non-geographic characteristics of many (perhaps most) ACNA sub-jurisdictions is, as you indicate, a by-product of the denomination’s confederal structure. At ACNA’s inception the decision was made – perhaps an acknowledgment of the human cost of the litigation into which the ex-TEC dioceses had entered – to make affiliation (diocesan or congregational) a matter of voluntary submission to higher authority. Dioceses (and, for that matter, congregations) are free to separate from the parent denomination without any consequence in civil law. Whether that makes for a stronger or a weaker church is an interesting question, but it is clearly a different model for Anglicanism than has historically been the case at the provincial level.
You raise an excellent point in suggesting that the wellbeing of a diocese is (or ought to be) associated with the region in which it is located. A question that I am hoping to explore in the future is whether a diocese like the Rocky Mountains (formerly a part of PEARUSA), which has also grown significantly, understood its change-of-name as reflecting the sense of regional responsibility that you describe. As for C4SO, one could well ask whether it is still shaped by its former AMIA identity or now embodies a different sort of Anglican patrimony. I can’t help wondering if the non-geographic mode of being church is going to be more and more of a 21st Century reality (and not just for Anglicans).
Thanks, Jeremy, this is helpful. Calling both C4SO and Rocky Mountains “dioceses” seems to…strain what that term has historically denoted. A non-geographical diocese is as curious (to be gracious about it) as a non-geographical nation-state. I do think that, especially after COVID-19, non-geographical – or, maybe we should call it extra-geographical? – forms of ministry will be more likely. Our parish, for example, has invested in technology for online services and we will continue to make that available via YouTube. However, there is also much to be said for proximity and face-to-face interaction. And, sacraments and liturgy are especially tactile forms of worship.
I write this as someone who teaches half of his courses online. Students will take online courses if that is their best (or, only) option. But I’ve *never* met a student who wants to do online courses; nor do I know any students who think that online courses are equal to face-to-face courses. I suspect that church will be much the same. Perhaps the question for OL education is really the same as that for OL church. Computers and online media aren’t going away. So, the question is not *whether* we use them, but *how* do we use them well?
[…] The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) grew markedly in the years after its foundation in 2009.… […]
[…] is another influential member of GAFCON, even though at 130,000 members it is tiny compared to Nigeria and other GAFCON provinces. ACNA’s Archbishop Foley Beach […]
[…] Read it all. print […]
[…] read with interest and appreciation a post from Living Church’s Covenant blog on “The Growth and Decline of the Anglican Church in North America.” Jeremy Bonner and David Goodhew make some helpful big […]
This is an interesting article. As much as I appreciate statistics (the reason I backed out of a DMin. program in favor of an Ed.D. with an emphasis in clinical research), what is not factored in, here, is what this amounts to. What does one interpret, here, or what is the takeaway from this? 1. It occurs to me that, overall, the ACNA is stagnating. 2. That the Episcopalian exodus has fostered some concerns for those not coming from the Episcopal church.
I have looked to three ACNA dioceses for the possibility of incardination. I have decided not to proceed with each one. Why? First let me say that one is because I made a geographical move from that area. The other two because of their ineptness with handling priests with valid apostolic succession outside the ACNA. The priests I have spoken to and the Bishops, have a distinctive Episcopalian arrogance and are not shy about exuding it. If you are not Episcopal coming in, you will have challenges – undue challenges. Typically, the vetting process works like stick around for 6 mos to a year. Get to know how we are. Take up OUR catechism, etc. and we will, then, let you know that you will, most likely not have your orders recognized and will have to undergo the process of progressing through orders all over, again. There is no actual application process, no paperwork that I ever actually saw. One may or may not get an audience with a bishop, even if his diocese is no larger than 2,000 people. The dismissiveness is astounding! The arrogance is really a sign of hubris that amounts to nothing less than ignorance. The liturgies are all over the place – under the guise of differences in approach and people merely visiting see these things. And there is any wonder that the growth/decline rate that finds the ACNA so static is surprising?
In just more than a dozen years, an organization that got off to such a promising start has little more than 123,000 members. The ACNA once had a lot to offer, and in some ways still does. If only the it could wipe the sad Episcopal snot from its nose, develop organizational skills, protocols to apply and be sensibly vetted, personal time be taken even if by Zoom for bishops, not archdeacons, secretaries, registrars, clerks, (who are often wives of deacons), but bishops take the time to talk to those who take the trouble to reach out seeking places of service and incardination. I had one, once, drive 2 hours to meet with my small church, to spend 3 hours talking with us over a lunch in our old church multipurpose room in Southern California. This man is a testimony to what all Bishops should be in the ACNA, but he is a rarity in this organization.
My experience is not uncommon, at all. And others, like myself, have simply thrown their hands in the air at the disrespect and quietly dismissed themselves from the disrespectful and dismissive process. It is unfortunate that I have heard so many, both inside and outside the ACNA speak of it as a “sponge for Episcopal priests.” Many men have come honestly into their orders with proper succession to be greeted as something less than those (among whom their are some that are in earnest and without superiority delusions) are full of themselves rather than Christ.
Apostolic succession is the hallmark of priesthood, but so too is standing for what is right, even to your own hurt. To many who left the Episcopal church before delaying around the fringes of sexuality, marriage, and sacred life issues – before their eligibility for retirement – I tip my biretta. But the many that I and many like myself have encountered that discouraged us from pressing toward the mark of the high calling in Christ I say, ask yourselves is it worth not even being able to attain to the 144,000 the Jehovah’s Witnesses work so hard to become one of?