Dying Churches - Death With Dignity?

[Craig Laughlin]

That data is available but it is expensive. A company called Arbitron is the de facto ratings company in the US for radio. The general wisdom is if you are looking for "young families with children", go with the soccer moms. Seriously. These are the women who are carting kids around, listening to a combination of "their" music and their kids' and news. In so far as bang for your buck in secular (or as we call it "general market") radio, that is most likely where your money is going to see the best results if you are aiming for the unchurched in your advertising. In so far as Christian radio is concerned, since we own several radio Christian stations in Seattle [KGNW (Christian)/KNTS (Spanish Christian]) it would probably be unethical for me to try and steer you. Although, I will say Seattle is not a big Christian radio market. No Christian station (no matter who owns them) does well there -- must be all that left over grunge :-).

Thanks Rene that is very helpful. I especially love the advice about Soccer moms. My family has been big into soccer. Since I come we have attracted a lot of soccer people. Maybe I'll ask them to ask their unchurched soccer friends what stations they listen to. A large enough sample would probably give a reasonable picture. - Great Idea.

Rate and depth of change have so much to do with the life cycle of the church that it is hard for me to make a broad generalization. Let me toss out two churches on our district as opposite examples.

I came to my church 3 1/2 years ago. The church had been in strong decline for nearly a decade. The previous 20 years had seen very strong growth under a great leader. (from 120 range to a little over 400) The reason the church grew under this man was that he was an extraordinary pastor. He knew everyone's name, their kids names and often their birthdays. (Think about this in a church of 400) He worked a cazillion hours, did all the pastoral care and on and on. He died of a stress related heart condition while pastoring. People loved this man and his love and care for them overcame the fact that he was very traditional in his music, unfortunately his style of leadership was not sustainable and it ultimately killed him. This left a very traditional church with a Hymn service and choir in the midst of a Seattle suburb community that was exploding with young families. Fast forward 10 years and all the young families are gone. The youngest people of any number are in their 50s and are threatening to leave. The church is down 40% and the demographic has completely changed. The new folks that have come are refugees from all the other churches that have gone contemporary. I was brought in "to reach young families." The problem is - They are doing a really great 1985 service and it is 2008. The sudden movement from 1985 to a contemporary service could not have been done slowly and it was painful.

Another church on our district just a few years ago had it's pastor of 30 years die while still serving the church. That pastor, rather than getting frozen in time had for 30 years constantly introduced small progressive changes. I was in worship with them 3 weeks ago and they do a contemporary service. There are lots of blue hairs and young families. Everyone loves the music. There is great unity in this church and it grew, under the previous pastor from the 120 range to the middle 500's.

Here is the problem. If churches will be constantly adapting they can avoid much pain. Unfortunately many, many churches choose to "freeze" time in a place that the folks in power like. This works for awhile and creates great joy for that demographic. Unfortunately they will eventually have to pay the price. -

In my opinion, not all churches are the same. There is no one way of doing it. It depends on the situation. The first question I would ask is, what is the long term growth curve of the church relative to the growth curve of the community. That will tell you a a lot about the health of the church.

Of course the third option is that we allow some churches a sort of death with dignity. Which I think is a real choice. We just need to be honest about it.

[Roy Richardson]

Thanks Rene that is very helpful. I especially love the advice about Soccer moms. My family has been big into soccer. Since I come we have attracted a lot of soccer people. Maybe I'll ask them to ask their unchurched soccer friends what stations they listen to. A large enough sample would probably give a reasonable picture. - Great Idea.

Rate and depth of change have so much to do with the life cycle of the church that it is hard for me to make a broad generalization. Let me toss out two churches on our district as opposite examples.

I came to my church 3 1/2 years ago. The church had been in strong decline for nearly a decade. The previous 20 years had seen very strong growth under a great leader. (from 120 range to a little over 400) The reason the church grew under this man was that he was an extraordinary pastor. He knew everyone's name, their kids names and often their birthdays. (Think about this in a church of 400) He worked a cazillion hours, did all the pastoral care and on and on. He died of a stress related heart condition while pastoring. People loved this man and his love and care for them overcame the fact that he was very traditional in his music, unfortunately his style of leadership was not sustainable and it ultimately killed him. This left a very traditional church with a Hymn service and choir in the midst of a Seattle suburb community that was exploding with young families. Fast forward 10 years and all the young families are gone. The youngest people of any number are in their 50s and are threatening to leave. The church is down 40% and the demographic has completely changed. The new folks that have come are refugees from all the other churches that have gone contemporary. I was brought in "to reach young families." The problem is - They are doing a really great 1985 service and it is 2008. The sudden movement from 1985 to a contemporary service could not have been done slowly and it was painful.

Another church on our district just a few years ago had it's pastor of 30 years die while still serving the church. That pastor, rather than getting frozen in time had for 30 years constantly introduced small progressive changes. I was in worship with them 3 weeks ago and they do a contemporary service. There are lots of blue hairs and young families. Everyone loves the music. There is great unity in this church and it grew, under the previous pastor from the 120 range to the middle 500's.

Here is the problem. If churches will be constantly adapting they can avoid much pain. Unfortunately many, many churches choose to "freeze" time in a place that the folks in power like. This works for awhile and creates great joy for that demographic. Unfortunately they will eventually have to pay the price. -

In my opinion, not all churches are the same. There is no one way of doing it. It depends on the situation. The first question I would ask is, what is the long term growth curve of the church relative to the growth curve of the community. That will tell you a a lot about the health of the church.

Of course the third option is that we allow some churches a sort of death with dignity. Which I think is a real choice. We just need to be honest about it.

I was thinking about the death with dignity thing myself. My demographics are skewed - nearly 50% over 50 years of age and 36% under 18. If I give those in power what they want - the old timey service, death with dignity is our option. We have already lost 2 generations, and this next one doesn't seem inclined to attend piano and organ sing a longs either.

It is a conundrum

[Craig Laughlin]

I was thinking about the death with dignity thing myself. My demographics are skewed - nearly 50% over 50 years of age and 36% under 18. If I give those in power what they want - the old timey service, death with dignity is our option. We have already lost 2 generations, and this next one doesn't seem inclined to attend piano and organ sing a longs either.

It is a conundrum

This is a hard conversation to have. I have pushed, in other venues, the need for the COTN to develop a plan for dying churches. I would be willing to help out with it. This is in part penance for my younger days when I pushed hard toward "every church" can change and become effective at reaching their community. I no longer believe that. I now think we need to let some churches die rather than trying to save them. We should then take those resources and plant new churches aimed at the demographics of the community.

I would love to see a thread on this...

[David Showalter]

This is a hard conversation to have. I have pushed, in other venues, the need for the COTN to develop a plan for dying churches. I would be willing to help out with it. This is in part penance for my younger days when I pushed hard toward "every church" can change and become effective at reaching their community. I no longer believe that. I now think we need to let some churches die rather than trying to save them. We should then take those resources and plant new churches aimed at the demographics of the community.

I would love to see a thread on this...

Craig, if your skin is tough enough to start and lead such a thread, I promise to put in my 2 cents. But please put on the full armor before you begin.

[Craig Laughlin]

Craig, if your skin is tough enough to start and lead such a thread, I promise to put in my 2 cents. But please put on the full armor before you begin.

I'm not sure if it is good or bad but usually in these sorts of discussions I seem to be more likely to be the one doing the hurting rather than being hurt. I think I have very thick skin, my wife says it is more like a thick skull. :)

There are a couple of reason why I haven't started such a thread. The first is that I don't really feel qualified. I have not been in that situation and I have not been a DS or sat on a DAB that has to make those kinds of hard choices. I do think I have significant understanding of what it takes to turn around a church in decline, which is why I think there are (probably) lots of churches that should be closed rather than turned. Some of the questions I think about on this issue are, when do you pull the trigger, how do we identify churches for closing years in advance so we can take the proper actions and what are those actions?

I would love to hear from some folks with experience in the field. We often look down on a pastor that closes a church or two but I am wondering if maybe there are folks that are uniquely gifted for "Hospice Care" for churches. Should we not train and honor those who serve us all in this way. I really do mean the dignity part of Death with Dignity.

[Roy Richardson]

This is a hard conversation to have. I have pushed, in other venues, the need for the COTN to develop a plan for dying churches. I would be willing to help out with it. This is in part penance for my younger days when I pushed hard toward "every church" can change and become effective at reaching their community. I no longer believe that. I now think we need to let some churches die rather than trying to save them. We should then take those resources and plant new churches aimed at the demographics of the community.

I would love to see a thread on this...

I'm not advocating death with dignity in my situation. But it illustrates the situation many are in which is change what we are doing or die. Because what we are doing clearly isn't working at many levels, including worship.

[Rene Tetro]

This is a hard conversation to have. I have pushed, in other venues, the need for the COTN to develop a plan for dying churches. I would be willing to help out with it. This is in part penance for my younger days when I pushed hard toward "every church" can change and become effective at reaching their community. I no longer believe that. I now think we need to let some churches die rather than trying to save them. We should then take those resources and plant new churches aimed at the demographics of the community.

I would love to see a thread on this...

On one district we had two churches that were relatively close, both physically and personally. One of the congregations was not doing very well on their own, so the two congregations got together and discussed the possibility of merger. When the DS was approached he was thoroughly against the idea, pretty much nixing it. The reason? It would show up as one less church on the annual reports. Sometimes church denominational politics plays a part in what transpires on the local level. Since that time one of the churches closed it's doors and the membership largely moved over to the other church anyway.

If a church is dying, unless some provision or plan is developed to turn that church around, it should probably be just left to die quietly: "with dignity" as somone else called it.

[Melissa DeBono]

If a church is dying, unless some provision or plan is developed to turn that church around, it should probably be just left to die quietly: "with dignity" as somone else called it.

Nothing dies with dignity when left alone. I think the concept of hospice care for churches has merit, there may be particular people with nurturing grace for dying congregations to get closure and move on, but I think leaving situations alone and not delivering the terminal diagnosis is not dignified.

Sorry to jump in on the tangental thought.

[Dennis M. Scott]

It has been my lot to oversee the burial of a couple congregations. There was not much dignity involved, but the couple members remaining were warmly and gently received into nearby churches. There are often unique factors involved that make things awkward, but at the least the memory of years and warriors gone by should be honored.

I also think that there are situations where a congregation should be permitted to roll along into oblivion doing the things they are comfortable with, even if what they want doesn't attract new people - as long as they are willing to help start another work to reach those they're not reaching. In fact, it seems like that is being more kind than forcing something that won't go. "No one puts new wine into old wineskins." Because a neighborhood changes to Spanish doesn't necessarily mean everyone in the 100 year old French speaking congregation has to learn Spanish. They do, however, probably have an obligation to start something new to make disciples of the newly arrived residents, who are most likely very responsive to the Gospel. I am aware of several old Nazarene churches in urban areas that have continued their archaic worship methods because "they" like them, but have hosted or otherwise supported new works for new nearby residents. That doesn't always work, but sometimes it does. Often a few of the new residents do make it into the old congregation, and seem very well incorporated.

One church I pastored had at one time had the largest SS in North America. At that time, it was not a Nazarene church. Over the next century, that church declined to literally fewer than a dozen members - all of whom were in their seventies and eighties. They voted themselves out of existence and donated their building and assets to start a new Nazarene church. A handful of them joined the new Nazarene church, which flourished, in the next two and a half years receiving more than two hundred members by profession of faith, and starting three daughter congregations. Same neighborhood, same local demographics, but different organizational goals and personalities. We did celebrate the earlier congregation, and their unbelievable gift to the COTN. My opinion is that the greatest dignity for them is the continuing work now built on their foundation.

Each scenario is different.

The only case where I would feel completely comfortable with nothing existing after a church had been somewhere for a long time would be if everyone moved away, and no new people moved into a neighborhood. If there's nobody responsive living in an area, I'm not sure we have any business being there either.

Unfortunately, theory rarely fits actual situations. It's pretty easy for me to figure out what Craig should do in Washington, when I'm in New Hampshire. :)

[Josh Robertson]

This is a very interesting conversation to me personally. Last Aug. (10) after 10 years in youth ministry I left a very vibrant conversation to pastor a church of 30 about 25 min. away from my previous assignment. It has been a very difficult challenge but in the past year we have seen the church move from survival mode to now becoming a church that is concerned with others. I interviewed for two different churches before accepting what I believed to be God's will to pastor this church. Both were in similar circumstances but I felt like this was in a great location and ready for growth. It is hard work but also very rewarding seeing this congregation beginning to make a shift!

[Dennis M. Scott]

Josh,

Thanks for your encouraging post, and welcome to Naznet. This can be a source of encouragement and I think lasting relationships. You'll see how the Lord stretches and enlightens a bunch of us - who have a lot to learn. You also can help teach us. We need you here. What's your background, and where are you now?

[Craig Laughlin]

Dennis, excellent post.


It has been my lot to oversee the burial of a couple congregations. There was not much dignity involved, but the couple members remaining were warmly and gently received into nearby churches. There are often unique factors involved that make things awkward, but at the least the memory of years and warriors gone by should be honored.

Yeah it seems to me that this is why we need a well thought out plan. I nominate you to be a part of the group to work on this. We need folks that have experience, are sensitive to the realities and emotions and are theologically reflective.


I also think that there are situations where a congregation should be permitted to roll along into oblivion doing the things they are comfortable with, even if what they want doesn't attract new people - as long as they are willing to help start another work to reach those they're not reaching. In fact, it seems like that is being more kind than forcing something that won't go. "No one puts new wine into old wineskins." Because a neighborhood changes to Spanish doesn't necessarily mean everyone in the 100 year old French speaking congregation has to learn Spanish. They do, however, probably have an obligation to start something new to make disciples of the newly arrived residents, who are most likely very responsive to the Gospel. I am aware of several old Nazarene churches in urban areas that have continued their archaic worship methods because "they" like them, but have hosted or otherwise supported new works for new nearby residents. That doesn't always work, but sometimes it does. Often a few of the new residents do make it into the old congregation, and seem very well incorporated.

This is one of the most hopeful and theologically solid ways I can think of to deal with a dying congregation. If they are willing to give themselves in other ways to supporting the broader work of the Kingdom I think they can find real mission while maintaining their identity. - Super ideas. This is the sort of thing that needs to become part of some sort of death with dignity program. (wouldn't call it that) :)


One church I pastored had at one time had the largest SS in North America. At that time, it was not a Nazarene church. Over the next century, that church declined to literally fewer than a dozen members - all of whom were in their seventies and eighties. They voted themselves out of existence and donated their building and assets to start a new Nazarene church. A handful of them joined the new Nazarene church, which flourished, in the next two and a half years receiving more than two hundred members by profession of faith, and starting three daughter congregations. Same neighborhood, same local demographics, but different organizational goals and personalities. We did celebrate the earlier congregation, and their unbelievable gift to the COTN. My opinion is that the greatest dignity for them is the continuing work now built on their foundation.

Another great idea.


Each scenario is different.

The only case where I would feel completely comfortable with nothing existing after a church had been somewhere for a long time would be if everyone moved away, and no new people moved into a neighborhood. If there's nobody responsive living in an area, I'm not sure we have any business being there either.

I think some of the hardest ones are the tiny church in a tiny place. We have communities out here with a handful of tiny churches, each struggling to maintain a building and pay a pastor. Just hard to imagine that it would not be more glorifying to God if a few shut down and they all came together.


Unfortunately, theory rarely fits actual situations. It's pretty easy for me to figure out what Craig should do in Washington, when I'm in New Hampshire. :)

Looks like you did a pretty good job. - I think we need to help these churches more. Sometimes it feels like we are walking on eggshell. We all know it is going to die but no one wants to say it. - I grew up in a medical family and one of the things I learned is that it is healthier to talk about it.

One of my favorite sayings. "A painful truth is always better than a pleasant lie"

Dennis Excellent post.

P.S - Thank you to whoever split this off. I seem to have the spiritual gift of side tracking a thread.

[Ryan Scott]

I've been wondering how much a building plays into this calculation. I can see many congregations who close because their numbers dwindle to the point they can no longer physically or financially maintain their building. Usually before they get to this point they've gone to a part-time or volunteer pastoral situation.

I wonder if there are instances when selling a building and keeping the congregation together might be a recipe for revival?

The congregations I've seen near death tend to be those who have failed to change with the context around them and thus the members settle in to wait it out (essentially until they die). However, nearly every one of these congregations has a few vital, progressive members who really do wish to reach the community around them. Are there ways we can begin to transition towards a community focus and slowly put to bed the traditional congregation?

I guess I'm suggesting a re-incarnation, of sorts. What was will die, but the name, tradition, and spirit of the congregation can live on.

The building comes to mind as key because most dying congregations are financially supported by people who are waiting to die themselves. You'd have a tough time selling a building before most of them were gone, but what would a re-oriented ministry look like without that crutch?

(I also don't mean to say a building is necessarily a crutch, but just that most dying congregations are old, often in old buildings not suited for the type of ministry the congregation needs to be doing. Would there be an advantage to downsize until the congregation can re-orient and figure out what type and size of building will work best to support the mission?)

[Billy Cox]

One church I pastored had at one time had the largest SS in North America. At that time, it was not a Nazarene church. Over the next century, that church declined to literally fewer than a dozen members - all of whom were in their seventies and eighties. They voted themselves out of existence and donated their building and assets to start a new Nazarene church.

...

Unfortunately, theory rarely fits actual situations. It's pretty easy for me to figure out what Craig should do in Washington, when I'm in New Hampshire. :)

Things vary from place to place, but the example above seems like it would be a 'win', regardless of the setting.

[Billy Cox]

I was thinking about the death with dignity thing myself. My demographics are skewed - nearly 50% over 50 years of age and 36% under 18. If I give those in power what they want - the old timey service, death with dignity is our option. We have already lost 2 generations, and this next one doesn't seem inclined to attend piano and organ sing a longs either.

It is a conundrum

For a church, dignity would probably include 'putting its affairs in order'; selling/relinquishing all property and real estate, terminating all employees, and incurring no new expenses or obligations.

Sadly, I think that the conditions that lead a church to have no future to start with also work against the church facing the inevitable with dignity.

[Dennis M. Scott]

Craig,

I appreciate your kind words, but after much prayer and soul searching, feel I must decline your nomination. Wait . . . the church I pastor now has five members and an attendance of ten. Maybe I have earned that office! I think I should cease sharing my ideas of how to start, grow, OR close a church. I need to crawl back into my shell and think about this one awhile.

[Craig Laughlin]

Craig,

I appreciate your kind words, but after much prayer and soul searching, feel I must decline your nomination. Wait . . . the church I pastor now has five members and an attendance of ten. Maybe I have earned that office! I think I should cease sharing my ideas of how to start, grow, OR close a church. I need to crawl back into my shell and think about this one awhile.

To late. Now we know you are the right person for this. Next time I get the opportunity to bend the ear of someone in power I'm tossing your name out. - Don't worry though, my recommendation should pretty much guarantee you will be left alone. :)

[Josh Robertson]

Dennis,

I am in Greenfield, IN. About 30 minutes east of Indpls. I am 33 years old. I recv'd. a degree in Youth Ministry from Mid America Nazarene and am now completing a Master of Ministry from Olivet. This is the first church I have been the pastor at. As a staff person I served churches that ranged in sizes from 70-300.

[Eric Frey]

I think another factor is the effect "closing" a church has on a pastor's reputation and career. I think (I know based on an experience I cannot share) that for some in leadership positions, if a pastor has closed a church they are not likely to get another one. So until the mentality of success = numerical growth changes at the various levels of district and general leadership, pastors will fight tooth and nail to keep their churches on life support -- even when closing the church might be the success that is needed.

[Dennis M. Scott]

I think another factor is the effect "closing" a church has on a pastor's reputation and career. I think (I know based on an experience I cannot share) that for some in leadership positions, if a pastor has closed a church they are not likely to get another one. So until the mentality of success = numerical growth changes at the various levels of district and general leadership, pastors will fight tooth and nail to keep their churches on life support -- even when closing the church might be the success that is needed.

Good point. In my case, I was pastoring one church, preaching at and planting another, and closing one. I think the starting of a new church earned a little capital. Also, the dying church had been trying to die for decades. The district had tried about everything anyone could think of, and almost everyone thought it was time. In another case, the church we buried was one at which I had been the planter. We had started a couple other new works, and several families had transitioned into pastoral roles elsewhere. When the area is increasing with new works, there's not quite the resistance to closing those that aren't working.

As for the political thing, I really understand it, but those that know me would tell you that I've not been especially careful about my career path. In fact, I probably am rather reckless along those lines: it is at least a lower priority.

[Craig Laughlin]

I think another factor is the effect "closing" a church has on a pastor's reputation and career. I think (I know based on an experience I cannot share) that for some in leadership positions, if a pastor has closed a church they are not likely to get another one. So until the mentality of success = numerical growth changes at the various levels of district and general leadership, pastors will fight tooth and nail to keep their churches on life support -- even when closing the church might be the success that is needed.

This is at least in part why a think a game plan, early identification and training would be helpful.

What if...

A couple of years out we say to a church, it's time. No more agressive treatments, (Young pastors that get eaten alive), We have a DNR order in place, and (unlike a human) in two years we are going to shut it down.

On the upside we are going to send in a pastor (probably older) that is great with hospice care. Call on you in your home, Sing the old song, celebrate What God has done in the past. Plan how the resources are going to do new and mighty things for God. Then when the time comes, we are going to have a funeral that celebrates God and all he has done in the place. Invite back old pastors, tell all the stories of what God has done. Bring back folks from the past! Introduce the young pastor and his family of the exciting new church plant made possible by the resources of this church. Present the plaque that goes on a wall at district office, recognize and celebrate them at district assembly... See, the mission of our church goes on, this is not an ending but a new beginning...

Then we celebrate those "Bridge" pastors that help us close one work in a way that makes possible another work. They should be honored among us. I might even be willing to do this in retirement.

[Billy Cox]

I think another factor is the effect "closing" a church has on a pastor's reputation and career. I think (I know based on an experience I cannot share) that for some in leadership positions, if a pastor has closed a church they are not likely to get another one. So until the mentality of success = numerical growth changes at the various levels of district and general leadership, pastors will fight tooth and nail to keep their churches on life support -- even when closing the church might be the success that is needed.

In light of what you just said, it would seem that the denomination is far more interested in 'not failing' than in success. Or, to put it in mathematical formula... Succcess = keeping the lights on. This is the point in the conversation when we congratulate ourselves that the vast majority of Nazarene churches in the USA are successful. ;)

[Roy Richardson]

on a fundamental level, who makes the call on this? The DS, the pastor or the board? If a church is on an unsustainable path, do you just let it play out until it becomes obvious? Do you start making provisions to move people to other congregations? Begin contacting realtors?

In a previous church we purchased the building of a congregation that chose death with dignity. They literally left everything, including financial records, baptismal records, copier, computers, cans of food, 110 sets of matching dishes etc. It was as if there was no plan to deal with that kind of stuff, which seemed sad to me.

[Craig Laughlin]

on a fundamental level, who makes the call on this? The DS, the pastor or the board? If a church is on an unsustainable path, do you just let it play out until it becomes obvious? Do you start making provisions to move people to other congregations? Begin contacting realtors?

In a previous church we purchased the building of a congregation that chose death with dignity. They literally left everything, including financial records, baptismal records, copier, computers, cans of food, 110 sets of matching dishes etc. It was as if there was no plan to deal with that kind of stuff, which seemed sad to me.

Yeah that is sad. What do you think about these questions?

[Roy Richardson]

I think the DS needs to recognize what is happening and have a conversation with the pastor/board about the options. It can be done with a great deal of grace and sensitivity to their situation. It is hard for them as well to know that their church is dying. He/she can assist with helping others move to a new congregation if they want to do so before the closure.

For some congregations who will not attempt to change, or who have attempted to change with no success, this may be the best/only option.

[Billy Cox]

I think the DS needs to recognize what is happening and have a conversation with the pastor/board about the options. It can be done with a great deal of grace and sensitivity to their situation. It is hard for them as well to know that their church is dying. He/she can assist with helping others move to a new congregation if they want to do so before the closure.

For some congregations who will not attempt to change, or who have attempted to change with no success, this may be the best/only option.

Organizationally speaking, there seem to be multiple disincentives to taking these steps. A congregation that has resisted change isn't lkely to disorganize on their own volition, because disorganization is a change. The DS wants to enlarge the district's territory, not reduce it. On top of that, if the feet of those bringing good news are beautiful, then the DS's feet must be 'detestable' when he brings 'pull the plug' news. Nobody wants to be the bad guy, and hey...if they're not dragging the denomination's brand through the mud, why not let them keep up the charade?

Who knows...maybe these dying churches are just one young, naive pastor away from turning it around? ;)

[Craig Laughlin]

Organizationally speaking, there seem to be multiple disincentives to taking these steps. A congregation that has resisted change isn't lkely to disorganize on their own volition, because disorganization is a change. The DS wants to enlarge the district's territory, not reduce it. On top of that, if the feet of those bringing good news are beautiful, then the DS's feet must be 'detestable' when he brings 'pull the plug' news. Nobody wants to be the bad guy, and hey...if they're not dragging the denomination's brand through the mud, why not let them keep up the charade?

Who knows...maybe these dying churches are just one young, naive pastor away from turning it around? ;)

I think every bit of this is true. It is why I would propose some sort of "transition" like the resources from the dying church go to a specific church plant. It is also why I think a year or two of working with the church would be important. Maybe year one is let's talk about this and year two is, nope can't be saved lets put together a soft landing (relatively) and dream about what good can come of it.

It will still be hard and require strength as well as thick skin on the part of district leadership. Still, has to be better than what is ahead in the next 20 years for the COTN, which I think is probably a blood bath of small churches closing.

I fear that one of the major responsibilities of the DS will be closing churches. You think we have a hard time now with people turning down the job, just wait.

Sadly I suspect we probably will do with this what we did with the money issue. Wait until we have a crises, then take action and blame the bad outcome on something else. I can't help but wonder if the inability of our denomination to adapt to a constantly changing world will eventually be it's undoing.

[Billy Cox]

I fear that one of the major responsibilities of the DS will be closing churches. You think we have a hard time now with people turning down the job, just wait.

Sadly I suspect we probably will do with this what we did with the money issue. Wait until we have a crises, then take action and blame the bad outcome on something else. I can't help but wonder if the inability of our denomination to adapt to a constantly changing world will eventually be it's undoing.

Maybe the denomination should hurry and close down a bunch of churches while they can still blame it on the economy. :)

[Peggy Gray]

[QUOTE=Craig Laughlin;91251] Still, has to be better than what is ahead in the next 20 years for the COTN, which I think is probably a blood bath of small churches closing./QUOTE]


I'd be interesting in hearing you expand on this thought.

[Craig Laughlin]

[QUOTE=Craig Laughlin;91251] Still, has to be better than what is ahead in the next 20 years for the COTN, which I think is probably a blood bath of small churches closing./QUOTE]


I'd be interesting in hearing you expand on this thought.

We are, in my opinion, rapidly moving toward a tipping point with many small churches. The age of the parishioners in these churches is going to force the churches to close as the parishioners go on to glory. When this starts to happen it will probably, given that most of these folks are the same generation, happen in large numbers. The only question in my mind is are we going to handle this well or are we going to deny until it happens then act surprised.

I was in a small church in a small place for a Sunday worship recently. Other than the volunteer pastor everyone was in their mid 70's. (that might be low) The church only ran 20 people. That church could go from doing okay to can't make it in a very short period of time. Sadly, it is not the exception.

[Marsha Lynn]

Dennis,

I am in Greenfield, IN. About 30 minutes east of Indpls. I am 33 years old. I recv'd. a degree in Youth Ministry from Mid America Nazarene and am now completing a Master of Ministry from Olivet. This is the first church I have been the pastor at. As a staff person I served churches that ranged in sizes from 70-300.

Welcome, Josh. It's good to see another Hoosier join NazNet. May God bless your ministry in Greenfield.

Marsha
(from SWID)

[Josh Robertson]

Thanks Marsha. I am also a former SWID person. I was Dave Warren's youth pastor for about 4 years.

[Marsha Lynn]

Thanks Marsha. I am also a former SWID person. I was Dave Warren's youth pastor for about 4 years.

Ah, yes. I remember now. You were around during the years my daughter Sondra was part of the SWID IMPACT team. It has been a while since those days. It's good to "see" you again.

Marsha

[Bill Evans]

Hospice for churches? Hmmmm! I am one part of an interdisciplinary team to assist death with dignity for terminally ill patients. Shouldn't an interdisciplinary team be used to assess the needs of a dying church in order to provide death with dignity?

[Craig Laughlin]

Hospice for churches? Hmmmm! I am one part of an interdisciplinary team to assist death with dignity for terminally ill patients. Shouldn't an interdisciplinary team be used to assess the needs of a dying church in order to provide death with dignity?

Sounds like an excellent idea.

[Bill Evans]

Sounds like an excellent idea.

Maybe the DS, a sociologist to assess congregational dynamics, representation from the congregation, a chaplain to address spiritual needs of congregation, a bereavement counselor to assist with mourning and loss issues?

[Michael Flowers]

Ah, yes. I remember now. You were around during the years my daughter Sondra was part of the SWID IMPACT team. It has been a while since those days. It's good to "see" you again.

Marsha

Josh and Marsha,
I am reminded just how young I am when I encounter the parents and youth pastors of my college friends. I know both Phill Warren and Sondra. The ONU region surely is a small region.

[Billy Cox]

Maybe the DS, a sociologist to assess congregational dynamics, representation from the congregation, a chaplain to address spiritual needs of congregation, a bereavement counselor to assist with mourning and loss issues?

Just think what a qualified team of trained professionals could do for a church not preparing for its own burial.

[John Reilly]

As Old Time Wesleyan Methodists we as Nazarenes ought to be aware of the Wesleyan "Decommissioning Service" which should be used when and if a church is designated to close. The cultural factors current today add a confusing dimension to the "ecology" of the local church in decline. Great discernment must be applied in understanding that 70% of churches in New England for example experienced a decline since last assembly. If a local congregation decides it is time to close a process of decommissioning ought to be applied which would culminate in one last sacramental service of grace where district friends and churches are invited to worship together, share in the Lord's Table, and valuable artifacts from the church are allocated to meaningful places for prosperity, and recognition is given to those who served faithfully.

[Gina Stevenson]

" ... and valuable artifacts from the church are allocated to meaningful places for prosperity ..."

(betting you mean posterity here). ;)

[Michael Flowers]

(betting you mean posterity here). ;)

He might have meant that such artifacts could be used to continue to prosper the work of the Church in another setting, not give homage to a preceding congregation. Basically, take the useful parts of a dying/dead congregation and use them to strengthen and enable another congregation even more.

[Gina Stevenson]

Oooooh, yeah, you're right, Michael. Never tho't of it that way. ;) Just seemed the other words seemed more to fit ... but then, maybe I was thinking too aesthetically, huh? :smilies1722:

[Oliver Phillips]

This is an interesting conversation, and one that should be pursued with careful consideration for the remnant few who are left to maintain the structures. I am leaving the GMC to pastor a church with 28 members left standing. I hate to use the term "restart" because it implies "death". However, I am sure that "renewal" is a better description of the strategy that would be implemented. The imminent challenge would be to reinvigorate and redirect the energies of the remnant to embrace a new missional vision for the future of the church. CAWKI (church as we know it) is dead figuratively, and the landscape for evangelism has changed. The future for the church rests in a demographic currency that is entirely different from the present makeup of the congregation; probably racially, economically, etc. I think the church could be renewed only if "lost souls matter to God" is the guiding mantra for the future.

[Craig Laughlin]

Very well said Dr. Philips. You and your vision will be missed at the GMC.

[Dennis M. Scott]

Oliver,
I, too, want to say "thank you," for your leadership and vision across the denomination. Your friendship and participation here are encouraging and refreshing. We will be praying with you in this new chapter of your life and ministry.
Dennis

[Dennis M. Scott]

Not all churches "die" at age 50, 75, or even 100 years. Some apparently go on much longer. Others don't merely "go on", but thrive in mission. Some nearly die - and in a sense, do die - but are renewed for dynamic life. After this thread has now been around for awhile, it seems like we're really talking about dignity in the aging times, that may or may not result in closing. Although I share appreciation for our analogy, it doesn't carry all the way. The older I get, the more i like the "dignity" part The appreciation for the "death" part is a little more elusive.

[Craig Laughlin]

Not all churches "die" at age 50, 75, or even 100 years. Some apparently go on much longer. Others don't merely "go on", but thrive in mission. Some nearly die - and in a sense, do die - but are renewed for dynamic life. After this thread has now been around for awhile, it seems like we're really talking about dignity in the aging times, that may or may not result in closing. Although I share appreciation for our analogy, it doesn't carry all the way. The older I get, the more i like the "dignity" part The appreciation for the "death" part is a little more elusive.

Well said, as we got into details it might appear that I want to close a lot of churches because I don't think they are worth it. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have given my life to turning churches, that being said, a turn around is not in the future of every church and not every pastor can do turn around church. (helps to have very thick skin) I just think we need to be realistic about that and have a well thought out plan.

[Dennis M. Scott]

Well said, as we got into details it might appear that I want to close a lot of churches because I don't think they are worth it. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have given my life to turning churches, that being said, a turn around is not in the future of every church and not every pastor can do turn around church. (helps to have very thick skin) I just think we need to be realistic about that and have a well thought out plan.

You clearly are not calling for closing a lot of churches, and your life's work is appreciatively noted.