There is a decline in spending from a peak in late 2003 to less construction from roughly mid-2010 to late 2023.
Spending is back up since 2022.
I can guess at a big reason for the decline in construction. Real estate crisis. Uncertainty. Not the time to start large building projects, especially if funded by congregations.
The uptick in construction is more interesting. Coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic, what is driving more religious construction spending? New congregations? Growing religious traditions? A lot of repairs to religious buildings that had been put off since the late 2000s?
Part of the reason I ask is I have seen construction spending figures cited to help show the growth of religious activity in the United States after World War Two. After the war ended and the population started growing amid prosperity, religious construction spending went up. Numerous religious buildings were constructed as religious activity increased.
What story will be told in a decade or two about the spending graph above? What data will it be put alongside to describe and explain religious activity in the United States?
What Wagner experienced with her shrinking congregation is arguably the most urgent challenge facing churches across America. Experts project an estimated 100,000 churches in the US will close or be repurposed over the next decade. Many churches will be unable to escape this “tsunami” of closings — a grim trajectory one pastor described as, “Every year the pews are getting emptier and the collection plates getting lighter.”
This is the challenge that “Christianity at a Crossroads,” a new TV documentary series, examines. The comprehensive four-part series, which premieres Thursday on PBS stations, features heart-wrenching scenes like the last days of Belding United Methodist Church. It also shows how mass church closures will hurt communities across America — including people who don’t attend church or care nothing for organized religion…
The shadow that hangs over the entire series, though, is the perilous future of the church. Christian leaders have been warning about the decline of American churches for decades. What’s new about the PBS series is that it presents portraits of the people and congregations behind this decline, along with specific numbers and a timeframe for the expected church closings.
As the documentary series shows some shared traits — accessible parking, lively music, powerful preaching and efforts to shower visitors with hospitality — seem mundane. But they are non-negotiable elements for growth. The film also spotlights the Church of the Nativity in suburban Baltimore, Maryland, which has learned another key to expansion: make church fun for young people. It draws about 800 kids and youths for its Sunday services.
A number of people have made such predictions in the last decade or two. The typical American church is small with roughly half having fewer than 70 or so people. Some church buildings are old and are expensive to maintain. An increasing number of Americans claim no religious affiliation. The decline of numerous denominations.
What would be interesting to see in the series (episode 1 is on Youtube) is the discussion of the impacts of closures. What happens to religious communities, both as collectives and the individuals within them? What happens to neighborhoods and communities when churches are no longer using those buildings or providing services? What might the American landscape look like with fewer religious congregations overall and perhaps fewer occupying prominent locations and buildings?
Robert Brenneman and I found in Building Faith: A Sociology of Religious Structures that some closed religious buildings were used by other religious groups. Newer congregations who did not have many resources could find older religious buildings that an older congregation needed to sell. The younger congregation might adapt that older structure to their own needs. My guess is that this will continue to happen, particularly in parts of the United States where populations are growing.
But if a tsunami of church closures comes and the rates of closures significantly increases, this could have cascading effects. Instead of a church or two disappearing, it could be 5 or 10 in a neighborhood or community. Are there enough ways that such buildings or properties could still benefit the community?
Inspired by this article regarding an older church building and congregation on the site of what could soon be a big development effort on Chicago’s west side, I was thinking about when major development might include a church building in a prominent spot. Not just preserve a landmark building or provide space that might be used by religious congregations. New development centered around a religious building.
These do not always go together in the American context. Churches and religious congregations are religious groups and community organizations. They do not generate jobs and revenues like businesses do. They do not pay property taxes. Churches may have been at the center of early European settlements in the United States but many of them moved as residents left commercial cores and the land became really valuable.
In new developments, developers might provide land for religious congregations or set aside land for such purposes. But put a religious building at the center? Imagine a new subdivision or condo building where a prominent place is given to a religious group – unlikely.
Maybe the only way this could happen is if the situation is similar to the article cited above: there is a historic congregation and building present and developers want to build something new. Construction could account for and even highlight the long-time congregation.
Another option: what if the development is led by or facilitated by a religious congregation? Imagine they have additional land and they want to stay. They could sell the rights to some of the land, stay put, and be there when the significant new development occurs. Or they undertake the development themselves, building around their own presence.
But since 1969, this building has been a church, shepherded by four generations of the same family. The blue part of the façade is their improvement to the building, 56 years of stewardship that extends up to today. They’re making extensive repairs to the roof this fall with a grant from Landmarks Illinois and remodeling the interior…
At 113 years old, the building once known as the Ideal Theatre is one of the oldest purpose-built movie theaters in the city, a rare remnant from before they blossomed into the grand movie palaces we treasure now.
And as the home of New Precious Grove Missionary Baptist Church for more than half a century, it’s a long-tenured piece of a Great Migration phenomenon, where Black people coming up to Chicago from the South created church communities as anchors, either transplanted from their place of origin or planted new…
Although the building’s façade has changed much since 1912, the red brick garland remains, along with one more hint of the entertainment that went on within: Above the door, a terra cotta panel depicts a lyre, the classical musical instrument. A historical photo of the building shows there were at least two more ornamental panels, comedy and tragedy masks on the two upper corners…
The palatial Central Park is also now a church, the House of Prayer Church of God in Christ since 1971. Another movie palace, the Ambassador, later Knute Rockne, about 3.5 miles from New Precious, is also a church now and also in need of protective roof repair.
It sounds like as neighborhoods and consumption patterns changed, at least several movie theaters became available and were converted into churches. Depending on the size and condition of the theater, it may not take much work for a congregation to make it a religious space. The rough structure of a movie theater seems like it could suit religious purposes; a theater would have a lobby at the front and then people would walk into a seating area with a screen and stage at the far end.
From the pictures in the article, it might be hard now for those passing by to see the movie theater in the past of the current structure. This could be due to the changes made by congregations but it may also hint at the ways the architecture of movie theaters has changed. The boxy multiplexes of recent decades look different compared to the ways movie theaters looked more like theaters – places for live stage performances – in the past.
It would be interesting to hear more about the building energy present in these congregations today. As Brenneman and I discussed in our book, we found congregations exhibit an energy about their buildings as they budget, maintain, and plan for their physical spaces.
Whether you’re a believer or not, visiting Hagia Sophia is a spiritual experience. The architectural genius of this place of worship — which was built as a church in 537CE before its conversion into a mosque in 1453 — creates an illusion of vastness. It feels like the space starts to expand when you enter the building.
I bet the builders of the church intended for this to be the case: being in the religious space was to be “a spiritual experience.” I was struck by the contrast of this versus what people today might experiences in religious buildings. Not many religious buildings can come close to the scale or the history of Hagia Sophia yet how many of them regularly help produce a spiritual experience for visitors?
Many congregations have moved away from architecture and design that could prompt a spiritual experience. Perhaps they want to have a space that can serve multiple functions. Perhaps they have limited resources and so are renting a building. Perhaps they believe architecture and art distracts from the true goals of gathering together. Perhaps they utilize modern styles which not everyone interprets as spiritual.
Having co-authored a book about religious buildings, I also find the idea that one could have a variety of or no religious beliefs and still have a spiritual experience in this building interesting. Is this because it fits some template of what religious buildings could be or because of its particular architecture or its history? The building connects with human needs and aspirations? That a building could produce such emotions is worth considering further through study and experience.
Working on some recent research involving religious buildings and also celebrating Easter yesterday, I was reminded of how many Christian churches feature crosses. Here are several local examples of church exteriors:
Not all churches have crosses on the outside. Some congregations want to avoid looking like a church and this could include eschewing traditional features like crosses or steeples. But many do feature crosses on the sides of buildings, on roofs, and on signs.
Similarly, if one were to walk into Christian churches, crosses are often present. They may be behind an altar or hanging on a side wall or incorporated in art or a bulletin.
And in looking for religious congregations online, I found many also feature crosses in the images they use. For example, in Facebook profile pictures and cover images, many Christian congregations feature a cross somewhere. In searching for congregations, a cross is a very common image one will find on social media and websites.
For these congregations that feature crosses, they likely see it as part of their theological foundations and part of their message of who they are. Christians are people of the cross and they share that image with the world. Whether one finds a congregation in a storefront, a school, an older religious building, or an online space, they are likely to find a cross somewhere and often prominently displayed.
Newly built or remodeled churches typically have a space with a sink and a coffee pot, Slagill said. Possibly a microwave. But no expanse of countertop suitable for chopping carrots, potatoes, and onions to go into a big pot of soup. No oversized refrigerators for Jell-O salads. No industrial ovens large enough to cook three or four casseroles at once. Churches these days don’t have a lot of cupboards with drawers labeled “forks and knives,” “spoons,” and “serving utensils.”…
A recent exhibit of religious architecture in the 21st century curated by architect Amanda Iglesias included more than 40 churches from around the world. Only five had dedicated spaces for gathering around food.
“Culture has changed,” said Katie Eberth, an architect with Aspen Group, a leading firm in the field of church design. “It’s not part of the culture now, the church culture, where you have 20 women who come together and make a meal. Today we order Panera or Jimmy John’s.”…
Hospitality comes up a lot, according to Eberth. But when people talk about what that should look like in the physical construction of a building, they don’t talk about fellowship halls with long folding tables where everyone can sit together. They talk about a café serving coffee and pastries in the foyer…
The age of church kitchens didn’t really get going until rapid urbanization started in the 1880s.
“The city offered saloons, amusement parks, and pool halls, places designed to attract and corrupt young minds with fun,” historian Daniel Sack writes in Whitebread Protestants. “Churches were just one competitor in the free market of entertainment. . . . The church had to use every tool at hand, including food.”
Three thoughts in response:
It sounds like food and drink will continue to be a staple of church interaction, just not food prepared in a church kitchen. Food continues to help facilitate conversation and interaction.
Comparing the physical spaces of a fellowship hall versus a cafe is interesting. The first is likely a large space that can be used in many different ways. Are the cafes cozier and more fixedly set up for socializing? In other words, is it just the food that is different or is there a different ambience in a foyer or cafe compared to a large room?
The priest who permitted Sabrina Carpenter to film her music video for “Feather” has been stripped of his duties.
On Monday, Nov. 18, Monsignor Jamie Gigantiello was relieved of his role after church officials determined that an investigation revealed other evidence of mismanagement, per the Associated Press.…
Last November, just days after Carpenter, 25, released the visual for “Feather,” Gigantiello was disciplined and stripped of his administrative duties because of the video, per The New York Times.
The Diocese of Brooklyn shared a statement with the Catholic News Agency stating that Bishop Robert Brennan was “appalled at what was filmed at Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary Church in Brooklyn.”
According to the outlet, the Diocese claimed that the Blessed Virgin Mary Church did not follow policy when it came to approving what gets filmed on Church property, and it was Gigantiello who gave Carpenter’s team permission to film the video.
As a researcher who has written about church buildings, I wondered how many churches or congregations would allow a music artist to film within their building. Would it matter what kind of music the video involved? Or if the artist had a personal connection with the faith tradition or the particular building? I would guess many religious congregations would hesitate before approving the filming of a music video in their space.
Religious buildings often work to separate profane – everyday – activities from sacred – transcendent – activities. How this is done can vary across religious traditions and spaces. If a congregation is renting space in a high school for services or is meeting in what used to be an Army barracks, how do they do this (see Chapter 6 in Building Faith for these examples and several others)? Or some religious traditions might mark religious spaces by distinct architecture and design while others argue they can do this in a multifunction space that can be a sanctuary at one moment, a gym the next, and a wedding reception space after that.
If this church had turned down the music video filming, where might they have gone next? Another religious building or a sound stage?
San Miguel Chapel is the oldest Catholic Church built in the United States part of whose original walls are still standing and which is still used regularly for religious services. It is the centerpiece of El Barrio de Analco National Register Historic District in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Adobe buildings like this chapel, historically, were not exclusively used for worship and ceremonies. Their size and location within the community allowed for a variety of gatherings.
During the 400+ years, first under the rule of imperial Spain, then Mexico, and finally the USA, the Chapel, dedicated to Archangel Michael, has been many things to many people. It has served as a place of worship for diverse groups of Native Americans; an infirmary for Franciscan missionaries; a target for autocratic officials and exploited Pueblo groups; a military chapel; a unique venue for talks, concerts, celebrations and ceremonies; and a sanctified space for Sunday Mass in Latin and English. Today and into the future, this treasured, privately owned, but ever-fragile structure requires constant vigilance and expert use of traditional construction methods and culturally authentic materials.
San Miguel Chapel first appears in the surviving historical written record in 1628. Construction my have begun by 1610 according to oral history, simultaneous with, or prior to, the official founding of Santa Fe. According to archeologists, this Franciscan-designed house of worship rests upon an early Pueblo settlement from circa 800-1300 CE.
The Importance of Oral Tradition: Few question whether or not the San Miguel Chapel in Santa Fe is the oldest Church in The United Staes, but many do question just how old it is. It’s no easy task to sift historical fact from traditional belief. Oral history holds that San Miguel Chapel was built around 1610, and it has been rebuilt and restored several times over the past 400 years. Oral tradition, stories told throughout the generations by local families and communities, remains a binding fabric of identity and historic pride for local people.
Official documentation stored in the Chapel was destroyed by fire during the revolt of 1680. However, many documents had previously been sent back to Mexico and Spain as reports to officials. Even today, documents naming San Miguel Chapel are being discovered all over the world, the latest one in London.
This might be a surprise for those oriented to a history of the United States oriented more to the East Coast or English settlement patterns or Protestant history in the US.
Additionally, this means the congregation and a building have been present for over 400 years, a large amount of years for a country often interested in youth and breaking away from older European patterns.
Finally, the building has been part of colonial activity, beginning with Spanish activity with Indigenous people to the aftermath of the Mexican-American war when the United States took control over land ceded to it.
An aerial view of the property circa 2011 when originally purchased by the Islamic Center of Naperville.
Nearly two years after breaking ground, the first phase of the Islamic Center of Naperville’s mosque complex on 248th Avenue is nearly complete.
Phase one work — the construction of a 28,400-square-foot mosque — is set to finish in October, according to Islamic Center President Anees Rahman. As of mid-August, Rahman estimated the mosque was about 90% to 95% complete…
It took 15 meetings held over nine months for the proposed complex to receive a positive recommendation in October 2021 from the city’s Planning and Zoning Commission. The Naperville City Council unanimously OK’d the venture a month later — with a slate of restrictions.
Those included conditions aimed at addressing traffic, parking, fire safety and noise concerns raised by neighboring residents. As part of the approved plans, ICN agreed it would not proceed past phase two — a 41,749-square-foot school — until improvements to 248th Avenue are complete…
With traffic projections estimating the road will average 18,000 vehicles daily by 2050, the city is planning to widen 248th Avenue to five lanes between 95th and 103rd streets and to add storm sewers, curbs, gutters, street lighting, sidewalks and noise walls.
This sounds like a good outcome for the group and its members as the building will open soon. This provides space for worship and fellowship.
At the same time, this was a long process with a lot of public involvement. The property was originally owned by a church who did not build a church building on it. When it was sold to the Islamic Center of Naperville and they put forward plans, neighbors and others responded.
Given what I found in two studies (see more about the second one involving the New York City area) regarding local zoning conflict and religious buildings, proposals from Muslim groups receive more scrutiny. This particular building is almost complete but what are the consequences of longer processes and more questions compared to what others face?
