Ask someone why a congregation would share its facilities with an outside group or organization, and you may get the answer, “It’s all about the money.” Congregations need operating funds, and rental income is an obvious source of income, correct?
National data challenge that assumption. Sociologist Nancy Ammerman’s study of more than 500 Christian and non-Christian congregations reported that “Well over half of all congregations have at least one outside organization that uses space in their buildings (either donated outright or made available at minimal cost).” The latest National Congregations Study survey of nearly 4,500 congregations found only slightly more than half (52.9%) of congregations that allowed outside groups access to their facilities received income from them. Faith Communities Today’s survey of more than 15,000 congregations estimated that “50-60% of congregations charge nothing to the organizations that use their facilities.”
What other reasons besides money persuade congregations to share space with outside groups or organizations? Or to deny access to certain users despite the potential income that could be garnered? Cases from my recent book, The Religious Dimensions of Shared Spaces: When and How Religion Matters in Space-Sharing Arrangements, offer some answers to these questions and suggest that theology and mission are critical.
When Ministerio Jesucristo Vive (Jesus Christ Lives Ministry) purchased its current facilities on Long Island from the financially strapped synagogue Temple Beth Sholom in 2014, they “pledged to allow our Jewish brothers to use the building for life without any financial responsibility,” as the church’s written history puts it. “Today we all worship the same God under the same sanctuary, this was God’s purpose.” The synagogue does not pay rent but covers heating and air conditioning costs and makes an annual monetary donation to the church. Sharing their building provides church members an opportunity to learn about Judaism (including why Jews do not consider Jesus Christ to be the Messiah) and to give their Christian testimony through loving actions, respect, and honor. Their theology leads them to hope that the Holy Spirit will use this relationship to bring the Jews to Christ. It also leads them to prohibit religious use of the building by Hindus, Muslims, and even Christian groups whose beliefs or practices conflict with its own. No potential rental income will entice the church to do so.
Heartsong Church in suburban Memphis assessed their theological obligations differently. They drew widespread attention when they welcomed the Muslim congregation constructing a mosque across the street, Memphis Islamic Center, into their facilities for nightly prayers during the month of Ramadan in 2010. MIC leaders had approached Pastor Steve Stone about renting a small room, to which Stone replied, “We will not rent you a room. This is not our building. This is God’s building, which means it’s your building, too.” The church went one better than a small room, arranging for the prayers to take place in a large multipurpose space where the church worships but also conducts many other activities. The rationale: if Zumba classes could meet there, Muslims can pray there.
Each of these churches understands outreach differently, and for each, space sharing is not all about the money, but rather a matter of fulfilling their religious mission.
Still, the decision wasn’t easy. In a video documentary about this partnership, Heartsong member Mark Sharpe confesses that at first, he “just did not accept” the idea of Muslims praying in the church, but after reading the Gospels, “I figured out…I was the problem.” Sharpe explained to me that it all came down to “love your neighbor, it’s as simple as that, as Jesus commanded us.” The only benefit to the church was “the display of the loving Christ. This is what he wants us to do, this is what we’re called to.”
Some congregations adopt a variable space-usage policy that waives rental fees for certain types of outside groups or organizations, again indicating that it’s about theology more than income. Space sharing is not a moneymaking enterprise, Harrisonburg [Virginia] Mennonite Church’s administrative assistant explained to me, but rather part of the church’s goal of “making people aware that we are a welcoming community. That’s the main thing that we want to convey to our neighbors and to people in the community, that they are welcome here.” Pastor Craig Maven told me why the church opens its doors to outside groups and organizations: “It comes out of our commitment to be a constructive part of our community. We see our extended ministry as being a positive presence in our community. We’re trying to incarnate God’s love and to practice the hospitality that is part and parcel with God’s incarnation. With us practicing hospitality, we are imitating Christ.” That said, Maven continued, “It’s not that we just simply open the building to anyone for any reason.” The church denies use of its facilities to all non-Christian groups or organizations, for instance.
Each of these churches understands outreach differently, and for each, space sharing is not all about the money, but rather a matter of fulfilling their religious mission.
Decisions about space are obviously also about resources. When Community Church (a pseudonym) outgrew the capacity of its original worship space in the early 2000s, they committed to erecting a new structure that would serve not only the congregation’s growing internal needs but the surrounding community as well. One staff pastor explained to me that church leaders “prayed that this building will be the ministry itself,” both internally and externally. An administrative staff person said that the church seeks to strengthen its relationship with the local community, adding, “I don’t know that we’re trying to gain anything from it.” The campus is large and sprawling with multiple buildings, including the new structure that opened in 2009. The church has a schedule of rental fees for various spaces, waiving fees altogether for certain users, such as nonprofits and municipal organizations. This generous policy resulted in so much demand that the church had to stop accepting new requests.
I concluded a previous essay about space sharing with two key questions for congregations to ask: “Why should we do it?” and “What will we get out of it?” I suggested it would be wise to determine early on whether the answers will go beyond potential rental income. In other words, is it all about the money or should it really be about something else?
