Congregation Closures in the US: Future Research and Directions

Congregations–including Catholic parishes, evangelical and mainline Protestant churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, and other spaces for religious and spiritual gatherings–are closing at incredibly high rates across the United States. But we understand very little about the patterns, causes, and consequences of the closings. During a two-day workshop at Bryn Mawr College, a group of social scientists gathered to discuss the timely and important topic of congregation closures and to assess existing data sources and methodologies for studying them.

Wendy Cadge (President and Professor of Sociology at Bryn Mawr College) and Kraig Beyerlein (Associate Professor of Sociology and Director of the Center for the Study of Religion and Society at the University of Notre Dame) organized the group in an emerging collaboration with the Institute for Advanced Catholic Studies at the University of Southern California, which provided funding for the convening.

The gathering’s main goals were to set a research agenda to advance scholarship on this important and timely topic and to outline concrete plans to move it forward. Leaders from Partners for Sacred Places joined the workshop to help bridge scholarly and practical concerns. They also took the group to various congregations in Philadelphia that had been closed and repurposed. One was Broad Street Love, a former Presbyterian USA church that now engages in radical hospitality to provide meals and other services to those experiencing poverty. The visits complimented and extended the group’s discussions.

Among the most significant conceptual issues discussed was what constitutes a congregation closure. For instance, just because a congregation no longer operates at its original site does not mean that it closed. It may have moved to another location or merged with another congregation. Given such complexities, multiple data points on congregations are required to document and understand congregation closures. At a minimum, researchers need data on congregations from some time in the past (say, 25 years ago) and some time after that (say, today). As the group discussed, collecting data over time on congregations is challenging, though technological advances–by Google maps, for instance–are creating new opportunities.

A related matter the group discussed was identifying congregations at risk for closing. Not only is this of great practical import–so groups like Partners for Sacred Places, dioceses, denominational bodies, and other adjudicators can work with congregations to figure out what is best for them to do–but is also very significant for scholars as so little is known about these congregations. How to address this issue? The group discussed surveying congregations to ask leaders about their overall financial situation, including building maintenance. But doing so is difficult and costly. In addition to securing data on congregations that contain viable contact information, researchers would have to conduct the interviews or hire a company to do so. Plus, given the sensitive nature of asking congregations about finances, many congregations may be reluctant to respond. Academic teams working with Partners for Sacred Places or related organizations seen as seeking to support the work of congregations and religious groups is likely the best way to tackle this significant, yet difficult to investigate, topic in the future.

Participants also discussed  the consequences for communities of congregations closing down. Studying these consequences–like closures themselves–is methodologically difficult. The very factors that may precipitate congregations shutting their doors (e.g., broader socioeconomic changes in the neighborhood) could also be associated with local community outcomes (e.g., increased need for social services). Moreover, congregations are not the only relevant data point as information from residents, for example, would need to be collected. The group discussed several possible research designs to evaluate the implications of congregation closures, including leveraging preexisting longitudinal census data and conducting life-history interviews with long-term residents of neighborhoods.

One important substantive point that emerged from the discussion about the effects of congregation closures on local communities is that as painful as it may be for clergy and lay members, congregations closing is not necessarily negative. Many examples of creative readaptations of congregations exist that are beneficial for local communities, such as Broad Street Love. The group emphasized the significance of documenting the range of outcomes of congregation closures–from vacant buildings to infrastructures providing critical social services–when assessing their impacts.

Relatedly, the group discussed the underpinnings of variation in congregation closures and repurposings, and their overall impact on communities. That is, what processes drive different outcomes? Why do certain congregations close for good while others become repurposed? And what accounts for differences in readaptations, with some sites of former congregations transformed to affordable housing units and others to high-rent apartments, for example. This generated a larger conversation about the relevant actors–from faith leaders to city planners, from philanthropic organizations to restate estate professionals–involved in the decision making as well as multiple factors (ownership of grounds, denominational control of buildings, local context, especially policies, etc.) shaping the fate of congregations and the land on which they operate.

As this summary of the workshop details, much is at stake and much future research is needed regarding congregation closures. The group will continue the conversations started at Bryn Mawr through monthly virtual meetings, convening larger meetings involving a wider range of participants, writing for academic and popular outlets, and submitting research grant proposals. At the conclusion of the workshop, the group discussed various options for a name, with Collaboration for Congregation Possibilities receiving the most support. The group hopes to finalize the name in the coming months.