How are you going to convince enough people that ~10% of their income and ~25% of their free time would be best spent maintaining an aging building and worshipping a god they don't believe in? That's about the most impossible marketing challenge in the world.

Alas, chansen is likely right here. Best scenario would be turning it into some kind of commercial space (I've seen some wonderful stuff done with old churches) and the congregation either rents back some of the space or finds more suitable digs. A huge old church is a liability, not an asset, if you don't have the membership to pay for upkeep and "build it and they will come" won't cut it with the utility companies and maintenance contractors. Smaller, more practical church buildings and spaces are likely the way of the future except for the evangelical mega-churches. Doesn't mean that they can't be spiritual. You don't need to have a vaulted ceiling and a massive choir loft to be spiritual.

Mendalla

Here is the church in question...

What renovations need to be done?

From their website:

Sackville United Church is an old style wooden structure and speaks to those who worship here of the devotion of past generations as well as of the faith today.

To a place like that? Everything. Just painting it would be a daunting task. If you don't keep on top of the building envelope, you've got rot, and you have to call someone like me to design a fix.

That is a high maintenance structure. It would take a very dedicated group.

I think this is a problem across the country.  Such magnificant buildings were built in a day when the church was the center of the community as well as the center of peoples social life.  Now, unfortunately, our smaller congregations cannot maintain these buildings and way too much our money is spent on maintanence and repairs.

So what is the solution?  Some of the smaller churches are conducive to becoming private residences, theaters, etc.  But the larger ones, whose architecture we should save, are a big problem.  No one wants to see them bulldozed, but in some cases this may be the only solution.  I would be more than willing to move to a smaller place for services, but there are still those in the congregation who are unwilling to give up their traditions, (not just with the church building).

So maybe it is a good thing that the UCCan owns all of our property and the buildings.  It will finally be their responsibility to do with it what they will.  However, it hardly seems fair, in some ways, that local congregations have poured their money into these buildings for years and years, even used their own money to build the building, in many cases. However, any monies that might possibly be realized from these buildings, would not be theirs to keep.  It's a little like being a landlord who expects the tenent to pay for all repairs and upkeep on the property he is renting.

It's mostly the roof. Generally, the place is in surprisingly good condition.

But I wasn't fretting about the building or suggesting we need big churches to meet in, or that if we built them, people will come.

My point was that a very tiny community well over a century ago was able to build and maintain such a church that seated a thousand. Today, a very much larger community may get a hundred - but it would have to be Easter or Christmas.

The church's problem is not buildings.

It's always the roof (though in this case, wood siding is a PITA as well). It looks like a shingled roof in the pictures. A steel roof is such a better solution these days, but you still need to keep on top of it. Plus, the initial cost is 3X that of shingles.

The problem is not buildings.

I cannot say the problem is even beliefs.

Maybe we just do not get it.

Church is church. When you reject church, you reject church. When you have been scarred by church, it is by church....

In this little town nearby of 18,000, with an over abundance of diminished and near empty churches was a recent church seed. It has taken off. Why? Don't even bother telling me it is because it has conservative views, there were oodles of those churches already there... I along with others put my head together with some of those folks and allI we, conservative and liberal alike, came up with is it is not a "churchy" church. Our thinking- It is in the park or a school library. No baggage associated with the building, the visuals do not say "church you rejected" or "church of your youth" (which can translate to old, stuffy, literal, etc), no overhead that says "empire", no pomp and circumstance, no waste of heat while other people shiver you cannot help because you have to raise funds for your ministry, no showiness...   M-I-S-S-I-O-N and S-E-R-V-I-C-E and I do not mean M&S, I mean at a personal, congregational level. It is making a difference and they see it...

Up the road just a bit, again old congregations cannot manage a dozen or two. A new church heads to town.... again, not "churchy". Same result.

If church keeps you out of hell, you will go.

If church is fun, you will go.

If church changes the world, you will go.

If church changes you, you will go.

If church gives you a purpose, a mission... you will go.

Even if it is still IN a church.

If church is just church, why bother?

Not quite.  If the congregation is disbanding then they have les say in how the proceeds of the sale will be used.  But even then they have input.  If the congregatio is NOTdisbanding but is selling property then they have to take a plan for the proceeds to PResbytery and negotiate with them.  THe proceeds in that case are to be used witha plan to facilitate ministry.  NOt just into the bank account as a slush fund but a plan.  ANd while it is very appropriate tha Presbytery strongly encourage or mandate that a portion of the proceeds be shared with, for example, the M&S fund in the case of a continuing congregation the congregation would well maintain control over the majority of the funds.

If the congregation no longer exists by the time the sale is closed however, the chance for input has largely disappeared.

I have a good deal of sympathy with SG's point. Certainly, i do not feel the building should be the key.

But the alternative, to build a community without having a building, is one hell of a challenge. I had a dose of it many, many years ago as a social group worker for the Y - and meeting for whatever reason we could whenever we could find a place. I suppose I could have become competent in it - eventually - but two years certainly was not enough.

I'm not familiar with theology programmes  - but do they offer such training?

I almost wish the church could inflitrate the Y, and make it Christian again. The influence of Christianity was still in the Y, and manifesting itself in good work, into the 1950s. I really owe much of the best parts of my life to that - both as a worker and as a recipient.

Why not turn it into a spiritual centre? A place for any faith to collaborate, preach and offer the best of all faiths. Guest preachers, concerts ( I just saw Loreena Mckennit perform in a church recently),a religious movies venue, discussions offered from various faith groups, debates, etc.......

This is the church that my sister and nephews belonged to. ( my nephews Grandfather was also the minister in the sixties/ seventies. I am wondering how the death of a popular minister and the resulting problems caused by that have had a role to play, or if it is just part of a trend.

Holy mackerel, Alex. Your nephew's grandfather would have been the minister who conducted my wedding service in 1965.

Waterfall has an idea that could be worth working on for churches across Canada. It still leaves us with the sticky question of who will pay - but it's an interesting concept.

It would also allow for an altered role for the minister     -   one that would offer the minister more freedom.

I like your ideas.  It would take some committed people and those willing to coordinate such events.  In an aging or aged congregation, this is difficult, since most do not want to exert themselves too much anymore.  But perhaps, if a few would get things started, you just might be able to attract more of the younger crowd.

I have no wonderful ideas to present. I just remember a minister who did it. He drew young people so well, that he had five of us committed to enter the ministry. And four did. This in a church which did not have a single person in the congregation with university education - and I'm not sure it had any with a high school certificate.

He also had all the men signed up to do renovation work.

I have been to Sackville, and remember passing the church.  My youngest sister and mother and grandmother were all students at Mount A.  I'm sure they'd be devastated to hear it's having such hard times.

My suggestion is to be proactive about use of the space.  How close to the University is it, exactly?  Would it be worth approaching some of the student groups that might use the space (theatre groups, music groups, spiritual groups, etc.) and presenting them with the opportunity... as opposed to waiting for them to ask?  Often University groups are looking for ways to branch out from just the campus... especially those directly related with other community groups. 

I know Sackville is small... and the deal with Universities is often that groups have high turnover of leaders.  But maybe an idea worth exploring?

The church is virtually on the campus. There might be possibilities in farming out the church. Of course, that won't ease the low congretation numbers.

People often say religion is declining because of consumerism. I think that may oversimplify. You can see the church declining with the introduction of radio, then with movies and television - and computers. (Yes. I know these are consumables. But they are also forms - if distorted ones - of social interaction and learning.)

Maybe  the church is declining because it is so concerned with ritual, so frequently out of touch with the day to day world, and so uncreative in social interaction and learning.

To hear Jesus debate with the elders must have been a rivetting, sociall event. Most preaching is not in a class with it. nor can we expect it to be.

I think this is part of it.  Not the comment on ritual, because I believe it is one of the few places in this world that really understands its power for centering and mindfulness... but of the out-of-touch comment.  I would absolutely believe that most of the University students think this.

Church has an opportunity right now to be on the leading edge of what 'community' could be.  Have a few conversations about it with those inside and outside the church, and see what comes of it.

The United Church with which I am involved is going through the process of putting on a new roof.  The cost of the new roof is in excess of $500,000.

The increment is cost of a steel roof over asphalt shingles was only about $35,000 but the life of the new steel roof doubled over that of one constructed from asphalt shingles.

Still, $500,000 is a lot of money that could be used to help the less fortunate in the congregation or even in the area regardless of whether or not they are members of the church or not.

The Church itself has been declared a heirtage site and that restricted the kind of choices available for the roof construction.  It has to look like ashphalt in order to qualify for significant provincial and municipal heritage building grants.

It was, I am sure, a difficult decision to try and decide to put a new roof on the Church or simply abandon the property and move the congregation elsewhere.

Is there any value in keeping up an old building?  I am sure there is.  A sense of continuity arises in the congregation knowing that the building has been around for a long time.  People feel they are a integral part of the ongoing tapestry of life in such situations.  They take comfort in knowing that they are getting married in the same church their great grand mother was wed in.

When churchs close their doors it is indicative of a lack of relevence to the ordinary folk who otherwise might have been expected to attend.   Can a religion exist without a church building?

Obviously it can and will as long as there is something of value in the religion other than the buildings it owns.

I've seen it done. House churches, churches renting space in other suitable facilities, etc. do exist. One local evangelical church rents an auditorium in Famous Players' Silver City on Sunday morning. Not sure what they do for office facilities and such like. Maybe the pastor works out of a home office or something and lists that as the church number?

EDIT: Okay, they may not be evangelicals. I hunted up their website and they are actually a member of the Christian Reformed Church of North America. OTOH, they have a fairly youthful ministry team and a praise band, so even if not "evangelical", they certainly tap into that vibe. They list a "ministry centre" in a commercial area of the city as their address and say that their "connection groups" (ie. mid-week groups) meet in homes.

Mendalla

It's the same story all over: the big old churches can't be supported by ever dwindling congregations.

My recently adopted UU congregation moved from their former rental space in a United Church to a larger church that is home to Montreal's Norweigan community (yes, there is one). It wasn't without controversy as the new home is a large old church that costs a fortune to heat and the congregation is pretty small. Some members thought they weren't being good environmentalists. 

The Norweigans no longer use the space for worship because, well, they don't worship anymore. But they have a lovely huge wood sculpture of the burning bush.

As a side note, this discussion reminded me of a joke Ron James told to an audience in St. Andrew's, NB: "You can you're in the Maritimes because the churches are full on Sunday morning. In Toronto, they're all condos." 

In Montreal, confession booths became popular accessories in bars.

(And I didn't know there was a Norwegian community in Montreal. Like the Dutch, they must integrate very quickly.)

Indeed:

http://www.norskeklubben.ca/ncaeng.html

They do hold periodic religious services, as it happens. The last time they were in the news was when they held a memorial service for the victims of the massacre in Norway last summer.

Sounds more like a social club than a group of practising Christians to me (but what do I know?).

A conversation recently (with a teenager) started off about about fishing but became about something else entirely!

kid - Ukrainians like to go fishing.  They aren't allowed to eat meat on Friday.

me - I didn't know that.

kid - I have some Ukrainian friends at school and they told me.  I'm glad I'm not Ukrainian.

me - Maybe it isn't because their ancesters came from the Ukraine, but because they were practising a religion that taught them that.

kid - Why would a religion care what they had to eat?

me - It blows my mind too - but some Roman Catholics are taught that it is sinful to eat meat on Fridays.  Maybe Ukrainian Catholcs are taught that too?

kid - But my friends don't go to church.

Holy Mackerel. I know that church. (My French ancestors just about owned Lachine.)

And the Sailor's Church is closed?

I wasn't aware St Paul's closed but then I moved from Lachine to Pointe-Claire a year ago. Closest UCCan churches to me now are St. John's United (which shares a building with the Roman Catholic St Edward the Confessor) and Cedar Park United which was in this month's issue of the Observer. I went to a Christmas service there last year and from what I can see, that church seems to be bucking the trend of dwindling congregations.

*double post. sorry*

There's Beaconsfield United. I don't know how it's doing, now.

That was the church that housed my UU congregation before they took up with the Norweigan church. 

And that was the UU congregation I several times spoke to. (But nobody ever told me they were Norwegians.

Precisely. No other preacher can preach like the Preacher.

If I had the money I would buy the place and transform it into a charismatic faith center.

I think you're short on both the money and the charisma.

 Clever line.

What I actually mean by "charismatic" however is that it would be a church that would welcome the Spirit of God, expect daily miracles, and where believers would be invited to use all of their spiritual gifts (which for me include teaching, music, and speaking in tongues).

Aren't there any New Age retreat centers in the area already?

What does that question have to do with the conversation at hand?

I can do card tricks.

That's wonderful graeme. You would be welcome at the Sackville Evangelical Charismatic Temple (SECT).

Is that the place where they play with poisonous snakes?

Oh. Sorry. I don't work with poisonous snakes.