Is the Purported Anglican Building Boom Really a Bust?

By Robin G. Jordan

Juicy Ecumenism has posted an article trumpeting what it describes as “an Anglican building boom.” A number of ACNA churches are constructing buildings at a time when other denominations are seeing a decline in building construction due to the state of the US economy. The Anglican Church in North America has highlighted this article on its website. Readers are encouraged to view this construction as a positive development.

The article prompted me to reflect upon my own experience as a member of a church building committee and the varied reasons that Episcopalians construct new buildings. I say “Episcopalians” because the clergy and congregations of the Anglican Church in North America consist largely of former Episcopalians. While they may have left the Episcopal Church, they are very much Episcopalian in their attitudes and thinking.

Episcopal clergy suffer from the strange malady known as the “edifice complex”—the proclivity to have one or more buildings constructed to satisfy their need to leave behind a legacy in brick and mortar. This is often the impetus behind a church building program. One of the results of this proclivity is that it leaves the church heavily indebted. Reducing its debt becomes the chief focus of the church instead of ministry and mission.

This debt, the financial strain that it places upon the church, and the rector’s desire to add more buildings to his legacy can lead to church splits. It happened to the Episcopal church that I helped to plant in the 1980s and where I ministered as senior lay reader for fifteen years. The rector in this particular case had persuaded one part of the congregation that the church needed a new sanctuary. Most of the vestry and another part of the congregation were not convinced. They believed that the church should reduce its debt before embarking upon a construction project of that magnitude. The split would cost the church one-third of its member households. The church which had been enjoying steady growth would plateau.

The church never fully recovered from the split. The public relations disaster of Gene Robinson’s election and consecration would greatly weaken its ability to attract new members in what was a politically and socially conservative region. The church which had been evangelical and charismatic in its early years would become liberal and Anglo-Catholic. Six years later the rector would move on and the church would lose its parish status.

Among the tendencies, both within the congregation and the vestry itself, with which a vestry embarking upon a building program must struggle is that mistaken belief that “if you build it, they will come.” This belief is sometimes referred to as “architectural evangelism.” While congregations may experience a brief growth spurt after they construct a new building, the new building will not over the long-haul ensure a steady flow of new families as is often mistakenly believed. However, this brief growth spurt is usually enough to convince vestries that they did the right thing.

Among the pressures, both from the congregation and its own members, with which the vestry must cope is the pressure to put form before function and recreate a particular architectural ambiance in the new building. The vestry that succumbs to this pressure will end up encumbering a much greater debt that it can realistically afford to pay off.

 I recall reading about a congregation that broke away from the Episcopal Church and bought a church building from another denomination. The congregation decided to buy the building due to its particular architectural ambiance: the building fit its members' notions of the ideal setting for worship. The congregation mistakenly believed that the building would also help the congregation to attract new families. The congregation, however, did not grow as anticipated. It could not keep up with the mortgage payments on the building and the bank eventually foreclosed on the mortgage. The congregation lost the building and all the money that it had invested in the building.

As Rob Smith points out in Leading Christians to Christ: Evangelizing the Church many of the people who come through the doors of Episcopal churches are drawn by their ambiance. The felt need for this ambiance is the impetus behind the kinds of buildings Continuing Anglican congregations have bought or constructed and ACNA congregations are now buying or constructing. This ambiance cannot be created in a school cafeteria or a storefront or other rented facilities and many Episcopalians and former Episcopalians cannot worship without it. They are not attracted by biblical preaching or opportunities for community, ministry, and mission.

Episcopalians and former Episcopalians show a tendency to make the mental association between being a church and having a building of their own. They do not feel that they are a “real” church without their own building. They have not fully grasped that what really matters is being a gathering of believing people who hear the proclamation of God’s Word and celebrate the sacraments of the Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. This does not require a particular setting.

Clergy, congregations, and vestries also see having their own building as a measure of success—as a symbol of permanence. Constructing a building, however, does not guarantee that a church will be in existence in fifteen years. One Kentucky website I visited listed nineteen churches for sale; another Tennessee website listed eighteen churches for sale. All across North America empty churches are being sold and converted into businesses, homes, or both.

The church in which I am presently involved does not have a building of its own. It has no plans to purchase land and construct a building in the foreseeable future. Money that would be used to pay off a mortgage and to maintain a building goes to ministry and mission. The church is not only impacting the community in which it is located but also a neighboring community, a community in eastern Kentucky, and communities in northern Mississippi, Nicaragua, and South Africa.

For these reasons I am inclined to be skeptical of the inference that this “Anglican building boom” is a positive development.