Friends General Conference and Friends United Meeting, dually aligned meetings Metro Areas (2010) [ Counties | States ]
  QuickLists > U.S. Religious Groups > Friends General Conference and Friends United Meeting, dually aligned meetings
Search QuickLists:
  • 2010

Using data from the 1980-2010 Religious Congregations and Membership Studies, this list ranks U.S. metro areas on the highest total number of adherents and the highest percent of the population in the Friends General Conference and Friends United Meeting, dually aligned meetings. You can sort the list by clicking on the column headings.

Congregational "Adherents" include all full members, their children, and others who regularly attend services. "Percent" is the percentage of the total population that belongs to that denomination. Note: Adherents are sometimes residents of a county different than the location of their congregation.

[ More information on the data source ]

Complete List

Ranking Metro Area   [Download CSV]AdherentsPercent
14 Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
235
0.03
5 Auburn, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
101
0.13
6 Augusta-Waterville, ME, Micropolitan Statistical Area
142
0.12
13 Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD, Metropolitan Statistical Area
1,163
0.04
15 Bangor, ME, Metropolitan Statistical Area
25
0.02
8 Barnstable Town, MA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
190
0.09
12 Barre, VT, Micropolitan Statistical Area
30
0.05
8 Bennington, VT, Micropolitan Statistical Area
32
0.09
17 Berlin, NH-VT, Micropolitan Statistical Area
0
0
16 Binghamton, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
17
0.01
14 Blacksburg-Christiansburg-Radford, VA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
62
0.03
14 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH, Metropolitan Statistical Area
1,284
0.03
16 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT, Metropolitan Statistical Area
134
0.01
16 Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
160
0.01
15 Burlington, NC, Metropolitan Statistical Area
34
0.02
13 Burlington-South Burlington, VT, Metropolitan Statistical Area
92
0.04
10 Charlottesville, VA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
157
0.07
17 Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI, Metropolitan Statistical Area
299
0
17 Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN, Metropolitan Statistical Area
50
0
6 Claremont-Lebanon, NH-VT, Micropolitan Statistical Area
259
0.12
11 Concord, NH, Micropolitan Statistical Area
88
0.06
4 DuBois, PA, Micropolitan Statistical Area
131
0.16
14 Elmira, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
28
0.03
17 Fort Wayne, IN, Metropolitan Statistical Area
10
0
10 Gettysburg, PA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
68
0.07
13 Glens Falls, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
58
0.04
17 Gloversville, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
0
0
9 Grand Island, NE, Metropolitan Statistical Area
66
0.08
1 Greenfield Town, MA, Micropolitan Statistical Area
182
0.26
16 Greensboro-High Point, NC, Metropolitan Statistical Area
54
0.01
17 Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV, Metropolitan Statistical Area
0
0
16 Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
52
0.01
13 Harrisonburg, VA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
46
0.04
14 Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT, Metropolitan Statistical Area
323
0.03
7 Hudson, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
69
0.11
3 Ithaca, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
170
0.17
14 Jamestown-Dunkirk-Fredonia, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
35
0.03
7 Keene, NH, Micropolitan Statistical Area
85
0.11
17 Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN-VA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
1
0
14 Kingston, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
46
0.03
15 Lancaster, PA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
98
0.02
2 Lewiston-Auburn, ME, Metropolitan Statistical Area
203
0.19
17 Lynchburg, VA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
0
0
12 Malone, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
27
0.05
16 New Haven-Milford, CT, Metropolitan Statistical Area
89
0.01
16 New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
2,478
0.01
16 Norwich-New London, CT, Metropolitan Statistical Area
39
0.01
16 Ogdensburg-Massena, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
10
0.01
17 Olean, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
0
0
8 Oneonta, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
53
0.09
17 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD, Metropolitan Statistical Area
95
0
14 Pittsfield, MA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
43
0.03
17 Plattsburgh, NY, Micropolitan Statistical Area
0
0
12 Portland-South Portland, ME, Metropolitan Statistical Area
234
0.05
12 Providence-Warwick, RI-MA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
749
0.05
14 Richmond, VA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
311
0.03
16 Roanoke, VA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
27
0.01
14 Rochester, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
314
0.03
15 Rutland, VT, Micropolitan Statistical Area
13
0.02
16 Springfield, MA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
64
0.01
3 State College, PA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
255
0.17
17 Staunton-Waynesboro, VA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
0
0
16 Syracuse, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
86
0.01
15 Torrington, CT, Micropolitan Statistical Area
43
0.02
16 Utica-Rome, NY, Metropolitan Statistical Area
24
0.01
12 Vineyard Haven, MA, Micropolitan Statistical Area
9
0.05
17 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC, Metropolitan Statistical Area
25
0
12 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV, Metropolitan Statistical Area
3,054
0.05
16 Wichita, KS, Metropolitan Statistical Area
41
0.01
8 Wilmington, OH, Micropolitan Statistical Area
39
0.09
8 Winchester, VA-WV, Metropolitan Statistical Area
119
0.09
15 Winston-Salem, NC, Metropolitan Statistical Area
131
0.02
16 Worcester, MA-CT, Metropolitan Statistical Area
87
0.01
15 York-Hanover, PA, Metropolitan Statistical Area
73
0.02


* In an effort to better match the ASARB standards for adherents, a few religious bodies changed the way their adherents were reported in 2010, including Amish groups, Friends groups, Jewish groups, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Non-denominational Christian Churches, and the United Methodist Church. This change does not affect any of the data in the newly released 2010 U.S. Religion Census: Religious Congregations & Membership Study. In fact, the data for these groups are now more comparable to that of other bodies than it was in previous decadal reports.

However, the change in methodology can distort assessments on growth or decline between 2000 and 2010 for each of these groups. County-level 2000 data using the new methodology are not readily available. ASARB staff has adjusted some 2000 county-level adherent statistics to allow for a more accurate picture on growth or decline. The revised maps and charts are now available on-line at www.usreligioncensus.org for those who are interested in these trends.

Source

2010 data were collected by the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies (ASARB) and include statistics for 236 religious groups, providing information on the number of their congregations and adherents within each state and county in the United States. Clifford Grammich, Kirk Hadaway, Richard Houseal, Dale E. Jones, Alexei Krindatch, Richie Stanley and Richard H. Taylor supervised the collection. These data originally appeared in 2010 U.S. Religion Census: Religious Congregations & Membership Study, published by the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies (ASARB). [More information on the data collection]