A Closer Look at Open and Closed Church Numbers
Philosphy of Church Multiplication | Email This Post December 12th, 2008
Historically the Assemblies of God has looked at the net gain of open and closed churches. While this tells us the number of buildings that have been shut down it is not right to compare these two without looking at the effectiveness of the churches opened versus the ones closed.
We have pulled the information for the last three years and here is what it looks like. We chose to focus on two key factors: water baptisms and total giving. Confessions of faith and Sunday attendance are broader in definition and more difficult to get an exact number. Water baptism is an identifiable mile marker in one’s faith and the amount given show’s the mindset of the church’s view of generosity.
What we found was telling. Over a three-year period the AG averaged closing 251 churches and opened an average of 271 each year. What does that tell us? Twenty more buildings opened than closed. But what did those churches do in terms of effectiveness? Here are the averages per year of those churches:
| Water Baptisms | Giving | Sunday Attendance | Conversions | |
| Closed | 603 | $448,249 | 14,703 | 1,822 |
| Open | 1,593 | $738,645 | 17,144 | 4,141 |
But wait…it gets better. We then decided to compare the per church average with our current list of churches that have gone through our Matching Fund process:
| Water Baptisms | Giving | Sunday Attendance | Conversions | |
| Closed - Avg | 2 | $1,788 | 59 | 7 |
| Open - Avg | 6 | $2,722 | 63 | 15 |
| Matching - Avg | 8 | $7,375 | 95 | 35 |
What we see here are the churches that are planted with through a process and done with the proper preparation can be even more effective. To-date we have launched 20 of our 29 matching fund churches.
As a movement it is in our DNA to multiply churches. In fact according to David Olson’s research if we didn’t close any churches we still aren’t doing enough to keep up with the population growth in America. If we will focus our efforts on vigorously multiplying and starting new churches, and looking at the numbers above there is a very bright future.
December 15th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Thanks for posting these numbers Steve. Your work to inspire church planting is important. Quality church leaders must always be concerned for churches that are closing. But this should not become a distraction for the great need to plant more churches. These truly are two separate issues within the church.
Thanks for keeping us on point. Keep up the good work. It will make a difference.
December 15th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Why isn’t the AG doing more about all of these churches closing? What about matching funds for existing churches that are struggling (often due to pastoral malfunction, and the new pastor takes it right to the gut when there’s no help available)
I ask because I’ve been there… and seen the human fallout. One could get the impression that the denom doesn’t care so long as the numbers add up at the end of the year and they can point and say, “Look at what we did!”
December 15th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Kathi:
Why isn’t the AG doing more about all of these churches closing? That is a great question. I’ll do my best to answer it.
First, a tremendous amount of effort IS put into helping existing churches stay open. Most District leaders spend large amounts of time doing everything they know to do to help existing churches be healthy. The reality is that most Superintendents spend far more time seeking to help smaller, struggling churches get turned around than they do helping helping strong churches go to the next level.
Second, renovation is much more complicated and difficult than starting from scratch. As you have implied, existing churches struggle for a variety of reasons…you’ve listed one…”pastoral malfunction,” but there are tons of other reasons why existing churches struggle. Sometimes it is as simple as a shifting economic situation (like a large plant closing in a small town resulting in an exodus of people and parishioners from the community). Other times the pastor is a good leader but some pre-existing issues exist in the lay leadership of the church that sabotage the efforts of the pastor to help the church move toward health. Almost always, these underlying factors result in agenda disharmony. So typically, the core problem is not financial and injecting money into a dysfunctional situation will not lead to a solution.
Third, the numbers on the closed churches give a little bit of a skewed picture. The “average attendance” number for the closed churches is based on a three year average. So the average attendance of 59 is based on three years of attendance. I have never personally heard of any church of 59 being closed. It may have happened, but I am not aware of it. What is more likely is that the church has experienced some sort of trauma that causes it to decline relatively quickly to the point where it is no longer viable. So in reality, these churches that close have likely dwindled down to a handful of people and the missional momentum is headed in the wrong direction. This reality makes them poor candidates for an infusion of cash.
Fourth, the whole idea of the matching fund process is that it requires the new planter to exercise his or her faith to find their side of the matching funds. The planter is starting with zero and believing God to supply. An existing church already has people who can exercise their faith together. The existing church already has a potential source of funding through the people who care about being part of a viable church. If the existing church is unable to to unite to exercise the faith to supply for the need, the challenge they face is far deeper than money can solve.
Fifth, a counterintuitive truth is that when a struggling church turns it’s focus from institutional survival to missional multiplication it will have the greatest possibility of thriving. The truth is that matching funds are available to ANY church that wants to multiply. When a church re-orients itself toward living out the lifestyle of Jesus, the first result is that they will begin to make disciples. Healthy disciples make other disciples. As disciples make disciples they begin to form into groups of disciples and eventually the missional momentum exists for a church to emerge. That is exactly how the early church grew. And it is still the way that church multiplication happens today. So, although it may seem backwards at first, a great question a struggling church might ask is how do we plant the seed of multiplication in this community and into the surrounding communities? As they begin to answer that question it may lead them to see the opportunity to plant a new church to reach a previously disconnected group of people. When they plant the new church, they can apply for matching funds.
Kathi, it sounds like you’ve been through a very painful experience and I’m pretty sure my answers don’t begin to make up for the difficulties you’ve lived through. But I hope I’ve at least given you a glimpse of why the matching funds are being invested in new churches.
December 15th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Steve,
This a great post. I am so tired of hearing about how many churches we have closed and we really are not making a dent.
It is not our job to plant franchised locations across the globe, it is our job to make disciples. Great work on all of this and keep communicating this to everyone!
And to all that are reading this: sometimes we need to have the guts to kill old yellar! Why do we think churches should last forever - none of Paul’s churches are around today. IT is about the people, Jesus died for them…not the organizational structure and building.
Peace out….
December 17th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Interesting post, great comments, and responses.
I know God’s heart has always been for building His Church (the one that the gates of hell don’t have a chance against)! So lets keep working hard to multiply the Kingdom of God and reach people. Because it REALLY is all about people (nice comment Trinity). No matter if we’re in a church building that’s existed for 50 years (like the local body I minister and worship in) or 5 weeks, the people in it are always changing, if we are not seeing new faces regularly, and always struggling to remember the new names… than maybe its time to refocus on reaching out to our community. The Church’s mission has never been only to take care of the saints, but to EQUIP the saints of God to go out and change their communities. It’s much easier said than done, but to be obedient to Christ’s Mission that’s exactly what we’ve GOT to do.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Wanted to shed some light in the closed church discussion. I asked our statisticians to pull the reason churches have closed between 2006-2008. Over the last three years (thru Nov 08) 744 churches have been closed. Of those 744 only 19 stated that they were closing due to financial difficulties.