Not a day goes by without a major article chronicling the fluctuating and unfriendly housing market here in the US. Major lenders are getting government aide to stay afloat. Some housing markets have experienced such a decline that many people are simply giving their house back to the bank. Foreclosures are at an all time high.
All verifiable evidence points to the housing bubble having burst. For years we have borrowed extensively and invested our funds, made ridiculous returns in a short period of time, flip houses, and increasingly used our profits to buy bigger and bigger houses. We have mortgaged our future for visions of get rich quick opportunities and the promise of more square footage. Is there any more American problem than this housing crisis? We have had too much money, too easily borrowed, that we used to borrow even more inconceivably large amounts of money and now we are finally paying the price.
In someways I feel like the church in North America has suffered from some of these same poor decisions. I look at churches with tens and hundreds of millions of dollars invested in facilities and I wonder, what happens when the bubble bursts? What happens when decline hits the mega-church? With such monstrous overhead and cost wrapped up in facilities, what happens if their growth bubble levels off? What happens when their markets are saturated? Many mega-churches are planting satellite campuses to address this issue, but it isn’t an easy or quick fix. Those sites will need to be self sustaining as well, so they don’t necessarily address a problem there either.
But this isn’t just about mega-churches. Many churches, suburban, urban, small and large, have jumped at the opportunity to build bigger and bigger facilities, but is this a good thing? Indebtedness has strapped the church when it comes to mission and ministry. If we don’t begin to address this indebtedness we will increasingly find it difficult to have the resources necessary to sustain the work of the church.
At our church I am glad that we have gotten serious about this. We have a lot of debt. This debt costs us almost $1000 a day in mortgage and interest payments. That is $1000 a day we could be using to feed people, care for people, and help start new churches. So we are tightening our belts, digging a little deeper, and within three years we are going to try and pay off our debt, with a commitment that the savings won’t be poured into buildings or staff, but instead into missions and ministry. That makes me proud of our people that they are so serious about stewardship.
What do you think? How has the love of brick and mortar affect the churches present reality and future dreams?
July 16, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Greg,
I will say that I think CUMC made a wise call to get rid of the debt as it has in the recent months. It’s a smart move not just for the viability of the church, but also to be smarter and more economic wise stewards of the money the church has been blessed with.
That being said, I think the church bought along the bigger is better mantra. Does every church need a full scale gym that would make your typical junior high blush?Or massive grounds to where you need a road map just to find the bathroom. (There is a church here in town that I visited with Maggie where I felt lost just going to the bathroom. Nice service, though.) These financial decisions come at a cost to real ministry of going out and serving the communities and those in need. I go back to a comment I heard in chapel in the fall. If the church is spending more than half its money in capital then its not being a church.
The church needs to be responsible with its money and finances. Outside of capital expenditures, one thing that concerns me as a future pastor looking at the administrative side of the church are deficits that churches run on a regular basis. Of course, budgeting is an estimate based on pass donations, however there are things you can do to save costs and I think we (CUMC) have done that to the best of my knowledge.
July 16, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Of course, another side of this equation, that I have been thinking about is housing with pastors. In the shift from parsonages to housing allowances, pastors have enjoyed more individual benefits from equity and personal choice. But, the cost has been that it is much harder to move pastors around. A dip in the housing market can financially prevent a pastor from trying to follow an opportunity. I own a house, so I am preaching to myself, but there is something that we give up in our ability to follow where we are called as we gain security and financial benefit for our families.
July 17, 2008 at 12:54 pm
But there is also the double-edged sword in what you are saying, Greg. If a pastor say our age lives in a parsonage his/her entire life, by the time they retire they have no equity or investment to secure a loan for a home. At 65, you’re essentially a 30-year-old in the eyes of the bank. So having that freedom could be beneficial to the family, but I understand what you are saying about the housing and moving pastors. Then again, that is like it with any profession.
July 17, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Have you ever seen the film “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room”? (there’s a connection here)
It makes a solid and convincing argument that one reason Enron was able to profit and grow as large as it did was not only because no one cared to check the validity of their claims for their clients, but because they told their clients (Chase, J.P.Morgan, et. al) what they wanted (needed?) to hear: “lots of money.” This does not absolve Enron, but it also indicts anyone else who responded to Enron’s claims, since they too were greedy – so greedy, in fact, they heard the appeal of profit, and wanted to believe what they heard.
I’ve heard recently (as others have, too) that one reason the housing market has been collapsing is due to the many points in the process where individuals can profit from high-stakes commissions. Everyone knew it was risky, but it’s as though everyone involved was so lured into the promise of money that they were willing and able to destroy lives.
Get many people involved
Tell people what they want to hear …
Get people to want to believe what they hear …
Perpetrators’ response: “Everyone’s guilty, so no one’s to blame …”
Destroys lives ….
Is it just me, or does this sound like a number church theologies to you?
jj
July 17, 2008 at 3:07 pm
JJ,
That is a powerful analogy. Especially since there has been an entire industry of church growth built around selling churches on this idea of bigger is better and reinforcing the love of brick and mortar.
Shannon,
That is the struggle I have with it also. Owning a house, as a pastor, does provide more security, especially looking towards retirement, but that doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with calling. That is the struggle I have in my own life. I own a house. I want to be able to provide for my family and to have a comfortable retirement. I just pray that I never compromise my call to do so.
July 18, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Thank you for bringing up this subject. This is an important subject because many large and small churches take on too much debt. But what is too much? Or should churches even take on any? That is a very touchy subject.
I know my church in the past wanted to upgrade from leasing a small room in a middle school to a million dollar church facility (this was at the peak of the housing bubble). I had to leave the church because everyone except for 4 people felt that their 30+ congregation could afford a million dollar note.
I know the Bible shuns debt. So, how can the Church as a “true” representative of the Bible take on debt? Course, how can it not, with the price of cars, houses, and buildings?
God Bless!
http://www.beatingdebt.wordpress.com