Like a school of fish swimming as one toward an unknown destination, the morning traffic sped by on the busy thoroughfare. As Kyle sat, watching the scene through the Starbuck's window, the commuters were heavy on his heart. They were the people that God had clearly called him to impact with the gospel three years ago.

Observing the silent processional through the vapor of his grande cup of Pikes Place, he was struck by the all too familiar feeling of inadequacy about performing the very task that had caused Joan and him to uproot their family and relocate. That task, although exciting and challenging, involved leaving a vibrant team at a large church on the other side of the state. With much prayer, planning, and preparation, Community Fellowship had launched them to plant a new church in Smithville.

"Hey, you look like you're a million miles away this morning," a friendly voice broke in like an alarm clock waking a tired sleeper. The voice belonged to John Holmes, the pastor of a small non-denominational church just north of town. John had quickly grown from a casual coffee shop acquaintance to a trusted confidant as the two pastors had shared details of their respective journeys and current struggles. It didn't take Kyle long to admit the difficulty and loneliness he was experiencing and how he missed the collegiality of being part of a larger team working toward a common ministry goal. After listening to his friend, John admitted to some of the same feelings and issues.

As John and Kyle talked, the conversation turned in a direction neither had ever considered. What would it look like if the two churches merged into one larger work? The pastors could share duties while the churches shared resources and ministry focus. As this new thought was being discussed, both men gained energy and enthusiasm. Their minds raced as they considered opportunities and potential problems. Finally, Kyle asked something they had both been thinking, "What do we do with this idea?"

Kyle and John found themselves in a discussion that is happening with increased frequency these days, and the path forward is not as clear as it may seem. For them to really know how to process this idea and to potentially take action; there is much for them to consider and learn. Church mergers are on the rise, but many end badly. To know why many fail, it is important to learn all we can about how church mergers work.

Church mergers generally tend to fall into one of two categories: life cycle mergers and strategic mergers. It is important to understand each because knowing how to proceed through investigation and eventually to implementation will be based largely on the type of merger that is being considered.

Life cycle mergers
Life cycle mergers happen in the last stage of a dying church. In the book, Legacy Churches, authors Steven Gray and Franklin Dumond, chronicle that all churches have a normal life cycle ending eventually in the closing of a church. On average, 3,200 churches in the United States close their doors each year. The current recession has hastened this process for many churches. Small denominations were surviving by a few committed donors who can no longer bear the financial burden.

That said, the economy has little to do with what has led to the final stages and decline in once vibrant ministries. The authors point to several common external factors including: change of land use in the area, major loss or population shift, aging congregations with aging pastors, and an inability to stay relevant to a rapidly changing culture. Some internal factors are: resistance to change, long serving volunteers that become territorial, mismanaged conflict, relational dysfunction, and long-term debt.

How can we determine if a church might be in decline? Here are some telltale signs:

• average worship attendance is flat or down for 5 or more years


• many volunteer roles go unfilled; less than 20 percent of the congregation is volunteering


• less than 5 percent of a weekly worship service is made up of first time visitors, and less than 10 percent of visitors ultimately join the membership


• unable to fund core ministries.

It is estimated that 80 percent of churches in America have reached a plateau or are in decline. That does not mean that death is inevitable for these churches, but reversing this trend requires re-visioning or re-creation. This is high-level change that calls for a serious commitment by staff, leadership, and the congregation. For many, the pain is just too high to pull this off. Change of this magnitude also requires someone who can coach and consult a church to navigate these complex waters.

Dying with dignity
If your church is in its final stages of viability, there are some things you can do to end well. First, celebrate your legacy. Over the years of ministry, many people have been impacted by the truth of Scripture as spoken through your church. Remembering why God called you at the time and place he did will go a long way toward helping you celebrate what your church accomplished during its lifespan.

This is also a good time to be reminded of why your church came into existence, what you valued, and how that translated to changed lives. You may consider holding a celebration service in which people can share stories about how God used the church to change their life or the lives of loved ones. Even if the remnant of regular attendees is small, this step is critical to helping them move forward well.

Celebrating your church's legacy and reviewing your core purpose and values helps position you in the next step. Now you are ready to find a like-hearted ministry to give your assets to as a way of helping them achieve their mission and carry on their original purpose. This can be done by investigating church plants in the area or other small congregations that are fairly new and beginning to grow rapidly. This gift will be catalytic to the new church's growth and stability. Often, church planting organizations or denominational affiliations can help surface a suitable receiving church. It is critical that the old and new churches have similar beliefs and core values for this to be a good match. The churches should consult with an attorney and a CPA to be sure that the asset transfer is done legally and does not violate any tax law.

A final warning to the dying church: don't squander assets or take on more debt trying to hang on longer. These assets can serve the Kingdom, if they are transferred and redeployed.

Strategic mergers
Strategic mergers are gaining momentum and are similar to what our pastor friends Kyle and John were beginning to probe. Two churches (usually new works) begin to see how they might come together strategically to better accomplish their vision. I believe we are entering a season where this will be more common. Over the past several years, many new church plants and multi-site churches have opened. Normally there is some consolidation after this kind of start-up activity regardless of the type of organizations being studied. We watch that cycle in business where, after many new business starts, mergers and acquisitions are used to consolidate them into larger companies with better critical mass. Couple that concept with a new openness of churches to partner with each other to share information, resources, and ultimately impact their communities, and you have a ripe environment for strategic mergers.

Strategic mergers look much more positive than a church dying and gifting its assets to another, but they are much riskier for both churches involved. If Kyle and John decide to go forward in merging the churches they serve, they should consider following some simple yet important steps.

Jim Tomberlin, founder of Multisite Solutions, has helped several churches through strategic mergers. He suggests following a four step process: exploration (usually between the two senior leaders); negotiation (between two top leadership teams); implementation (phased integration of the two churches into one body-single location or multi-site); and finally, consolidation (completion of merger and movement forward with a unified mission and vision).

Tomberlin also recommends against viewing a merger as two equals becoming one. A more realistic approach is to see the union as one church adopting the other.

During the exploration phase, the senior leaders need to discuss beliefs and ministry practices as well as common code. Code is mission, vision, values, and sometimes core strategies of each church. The leaders will also need to discuss the role of the "adopted" pastor in the church. Most, if not all, of the elements of the code must be shared by both leaders and churches or the adoption should not go forward.

After the exploratory discussions between senior leaders are complete and both feel good about going forward, it is time for both leadership groups to be brought into the discussion for negotiation. This phase needs to be done quickly, due to the sensitive nature of the communication and the negative impact that premature communication could have on the rest of either church. If this phase can't be done in 30 to 45 days, it should not be done at all. The teams will need to discuss issues, such as jointly assessing the strengths and weaknesses of both churches, blending of staff and role changes for some of the staff team, staff compensation alignment, assets and liabilities of each church, potential legal issues around governance documents, and the development of an implementation plan with a realistic time line and a strategy for communication.

Once the first two steps are complete, it will be time for implementation. A clear communication plan will need to be executed to multiple audiences in each church. Staff and key leaders will need an early and thorough understanding of the plan. As the plan goes to the congregations, remember to answer three important questions that people will want answered:

1. Is God in this? This will require vision casting.
2. Has my leadership thought this through? This is the time to share plan details and answer questions.
3. What would you like me to do? Be ready to tell the congregation what their part in this is and why.

Unlike the negotiation phase, which must happen quickly, the implementation phase should be given plenty of time. Rushing now could sabotage an otherwise good plan. People need time to pray, process, and ask questions. The church being adopted may benefit from a time of celebration of the past, just like the dying church in the life cycle merger. Staff teams and leadership groups also must be given time to merge and adapt to new roles and responsibilities. What emerges will be new for everyone.

Finally, when implementation is complete, it is time for true consolidation. This should be marked by fresh vision, celebration of the new potential God has created, and new strategies for increased effectiveness. Be sure that staff, leaders, and key volunteers from both churches are involved at every level of leadership and place of service. During this time, it is also wise to create extra listening and communication sessions for people to help them continue to make the transition without feeling marginalized.

Why mergers fail
Jim Tomberlin has developed a list of some of the most common reasons that church mergers fail, including unclear or inconsistent expectations between the two churches, lack of clarity about non-negotiable issues held by either church (values), unwillingness of one senior pastor or leader to subordinate to the other or one church not willing to relinquish control to the other, inability to achieve at least an 80 percent match in style and philosophy, or the risks were greater than the rewards but the merger went ahead anyway.

This is a good time to mention a few other cautions: Don't assume that everyone will successfully transition. You will lose staff, leaders, members, and some giving during the merger. Following this process should keep those losses manageable and less painful. Two unhealthy or struggling churches should not think that they can merge and become one healthy church. A merger can shore up some weaknesses as each church brings something to the table, but if neither is functioning well, the merger will normally only hasten the decline.

Armed with this new information, Kyle and John now have a great template for their discussion. They decided to meet weekly and share elements of each church's code. They were surprised to learn over the next few months how similar their core beliefs were, but how different their vision and values were. They ultimately concluded that they could serve their community better by doing joint outreach and community service projects together, but they needed to remain separate churches. The process helped them see that they could meet regularly for accountability and encouragement. They eventually began to include their wives and families in times of refreshment and renewal. The community has been positively impacted by having both of these churches as a part of it, and both continue to meet the needs of an ever-increasing number of congregants.