How can closing churches become a growth strategy?

This article has particular relevance for denominational leaders – both national and regional. It is about how we might better close churches.

• Sometimes the closing of a ‘church’ cannot be avoided. A congregation ages. Change isn’t easy. They fail to find a path toward renewed life for their gatherings as a community. It’s not something we cherish – but it happens!

Given this reality, how might we close them well – with a view even to the generating of new hope and life?

One definition is needed first.

I will refer to the closing of ‘church structures’ not ‘churches’.

• The ‘church’ is the people
• The whole point is that in closing a ‘church structure’ we want to do so with the well-being of the people and wider Church in tact – and even encouraged.

I hope this helps.

When a church structure is closed, it should be a celebration of what God has done – not a funeral.

A community of people have gathered in this place.

There is decades of history to it – and thousands of interconnected relationships.

It is a tragedy in one sense – and yet it could be that many who were previously in this community have now relocated to participate with a ‘community base’ elsewhere. No one was actually ‘lost’ in the process!

But it happens! Given this fact, how might we turn the closing months and weeks into a celebration?

• While the  idea is easy, pulling it off is not! 

Story 1: A church closing that was a celebration and that brought blessing

I was blessed to engage with a number of members in a once-lively church that reached a point of admitting they couldn’t attract new blood. They needed to close their doors. I suggested they celebrate all the church had done since its planting, sell the building – and then continue to meet in homes for another year to give away plausibly tens of thousands of dollars each week to charities of their choosing.

They chose to do this.

For the thinking process – to explain how closing a congregation’s structure, location and identity can be perceived as a celebration:

1. Firstly, they recognised that if every person went to another church there was NO DECLINE in God’s Church in their city! They all agreed to go to another church.
2. Furthermore, time given to maintaining a church building and running services etc… could potentially be redeployed to more useful charitable work if they were all members of another congregation. (Our second story illustrates this point well).
3. The next consideration is to preserve things a congregation is doing in service to the community. In this case I believe there were very few things remaining, so this part was easy.
4. All that then remains is the assets. In this case they agreed to then continue to meet together, as above, to share stories and progressively give away the money from the sale of their building – which they had funded over the 30 prior years.

>> I suggest that this example illustrates the desired DNA  in the closing of a church structure. 

However, not all churches own their buildings!

Story 2: Joined another congregation – with plans to bless others with the building

A remarkable South Island brethren church reached the same point – with about 15 attendees remaining from what I understand and recall.

They all agreed to attend other churches – so that NONE could be said to have left participation with God’s Church. All that was ‘dying’ was their perception of themselves as a specific community with its own identity.

I understand that they had almost no community engagements happening because the volunteer hours of 15 people can be taken up with building maintenance, lawns, weekly worship, accounts, weekly preaching and cups of tea.

However, in this case they kept the building – which I believe they rightly owned (I believe they were structurally independent, so could choose which charities to gift the building or funds to if they desired).

As I understand it all members then joined one other congregation together – and then proceeded to serve in and pioneer three key outreach ministries in that church. Time previously given to building maintenance, preparing worship, preparing sermons and making cups of tea was now deployed to gospel work!

The result was remarkable.

• The church they served in then grew necessitating a building project.
• A congregation was found that needed a building – which once in the building, enjoying the sense of security and ‘togetherness’ a community base gave them – also then grew – necessitating a building project.

To note the catalyst, the ‘closing’ of an individual  local church structure and identity was catalytic in notable new growth in two congregations! 

How do you make a sad closing into a celebration?

The key to making it a celebration is in our PERCEPTION – which is defined by the STORIES we see.

No lack of authenticity is being suggested here.

The challenge is to DIG OUT the right mixture of STORIES that demonstrate the genuine good that this ‘community base’ generated across the decades. Even if this congregation is now elderly and/or has lost momentum for some other reason, in prior seasons they will have people coming to faith, growing in faith, being sustained in faith through hard times – and giving wider help to the community.

The weight given to these stories in the final gatherings and celebrations is what will determine the ending perception!

The goal should be to have people leaving the ‘closing’ celebration thinking, “We should have kept the doors open. This has been an amazing place!”

• To state it again – that sentiment is the goal.

Those who leave to go to other congregations, then leave uplifted, rather than feeling defeated. They therefore also leave with vision to do good again – rather than to hide in the back seats of a congregation for the next few decades.

• It is caring for the PEOPLE that counts the most!
• Closing things can generate life if done right!

A lateral thought: What if we…?

For the situation, consider a congregation that is about to close its doors in a denomination in which the  building belongs to the denomination itself, not to the congregation.

What if the members of a church structure/identity being closed like this were given a sundry amount – like $200,000, which they would get to give to the charities of their choice?

• This could be given pending sale of a building.
• (…Only unless the gifting of the building to a more vibrant congregation who could give it life again were agreed – like above.)

While the majority of the funds from the building would still go to the denomination, consider:

• …this would be a small token – all things considered.
• This represents generosity.
• This allows the MEMBERS of the church that is being closed an opportunity to be generous.

This could be profound in its impact.

To consider why we might NOT do this: Our denominations might be hungry for that money! Those in them might even feel pleased and relieved a church is closing – so they can have that money!!!

• To point it out, this could lead to impure motive, or a lack of sincerity and due diligence in the above.
• If people are what matter, the above process prioritises people – even while creativity for the process of this might be needed.
• Who needs the most care in the closing of a church structure? The people do!

Story 3: An amazing pastor

This final story is of one of my heroes.

While those involved likely wouldn’t mind their identities being revealed, I’ll keep it quiet just in case.

A church pastor, who I truly consider a legend, took on a challenging elderly church in a central city area. Efforts to revitalise it were significant. A younger congregation was started – but half a dozen years later it just wasn’t working. He went as far as to meet with the younger families, suggesting they go to other churches because their wellbeing and the discipleship of their children was more important than faithfulness to a church structure and identity. His selfless conduct was admirable to the highest order!

He then sought and achieved partnership with a much larger church from the same denomination – and submitted his position to them (surrendering all ‘power’).

• This led to maybe 100 coming to start a NEW congregation, with the remaining older people still in that mix.
• They then navigated this brilliantly – noting grief in the older ones with changes in music styles, while delight at having a children’s ministry and youth ministry again!
• A central city church was thereby PRESERVED – which I suggest was a service to the name of Christ in the city, not just a service to that one congregation and history.

This is a truely successful true story! The pastors humility – as also that of the older members who agreed to this process and vision – resulted in the positioning of a new congregation with a vibrant future in a great building that also has a great location!

(That pastor then quietly stepped aside, giving room to younger leadership – while redeploying himself into wider-reaching Christian mission.)

In summary

How might the ending of an individual church structure and identity be made into a genuine celebration?

Could it be agreed amongst all remnants of a congregation that they will go to another church – so they all know that God’s Church in the city hasn’t declined at all in the process?

If there are community ministries that are still effective, how might these be sustained? It is the PEOPLE who are the priority.

How then could something of the scope of good that has been achieved in prior decades be brought to life, being told in a celebration – leaving an impression so positive people leave with a genuine feeling of celebration and thankfulness?

What other options might exist for encouraging and affirming the remaining congregation in addition – potentially positioning them to do something truly generous in their final days together?

The closing of some local congregational structures and identities is inevitable.

It is possible to close something in a way that generates life.

May God’s creativity be ours to achieving this!