Table of Contents
Building costs do not end at completion
The human desire for visible achievement
Building with maintenance in mind
Last week’s post examined subsidiarity-integrated centralisation and Catholic healthcare, following the previous discussion on Catholic education. In both cases, the argument was that Catholic institutions do not need to be placed under a single administrative authority because such a move would undermine subsidiarity. Instead, selected resources, expertise, services and infrastructure can be coordinated across institutions to create value and improve pastoral fruitfulness, whilst preserving individual autonomy.
Buildings present a different governance reality because, unlike some aspects of education and healthcare, managing parish, school, hospital, and other Church (ecclesial) buildings is directly connected to the responsibility of the person entrusted with administering the institution, whether pastor, principal, or administrator. Decisions about buildings and furniture cannot simply be transferred to the centre in the name of efficiency without undermining subsidiarity that ecclesial governance should protect. This is one of the limits of subsidiarity-integrated centralisation.
Therefore, the question here is not about some central coordination or management of ecclesial buildings, but about how the Church can become sustainable in constructing and maintaining them. This is the focus of today’s post.
Building Progressively
In Nigeria, it is common to begin an ecclesial building without having all the funds required to complete it. The faithful contribute over time according to their means until the building is complete. It is common to see ecclesial building projects consciously undertaken as long-term projects that will extend beyond the tenure of the pastor who initiates them.
While this might be considered financial recklessness, this system has been effective for the Nigerian context as the Church here often lacks patrimony accumulated over generations, and taking loans, directly or indirectly, is very risky for financial sustainability. Without this approach, most churches, fathers’ houses, schools, hospitals and other church buildings would not have been built. Hence, in Nigeria, this approach should not automatically be regarded as poor management, because the fact that a project takes many years is not, by itself, evidence of bad stewardship of ecclesial resources.
Therefore, the important question is not whether the Church has all the funds before beginning a building project, but whether the Church has considered sustainability and maintenance beyond construction. A project expected to take many years can suffer serious delays due to rising costs of building materials, the death or financial crisis of a benefactor, insecurity, the appointment of a new pastor, and changes in pastoral priorities.
Building costs do not end at completion
Completing an ecclesial building is the earnest desire of every pastor and pastoral community.
Yet, completing a building is not the end of its financial life; another financial commitment begins after construction.
Funds are needed to repair leaking and deteriorated roofs; repaint walls; service electrical and plumbing systems; replace stolen items or those damaged by natural disasters such as thunder strikes, heavy wind, and floods; replace worn-out furniture; and maintain grounds or floors. Maintenance costs are very high and, over time, can accumulate to an amount comparable to or even greater than the initial construction costs.
This is where pastoral priorities come into play. A parish may need to maintain existing buildings while considering constructing a new one. Sometimes, a new structure is the better investment. At other times, rehabilitating an existing building or improving existing infrastructure is the better option. Moreover, setting aside funds for future maintenance is always an option.
Hence, the question is not whether the new building project can contribute to pastoral fruitfulness. No one expects a pastor to think otherwise. Instead, the question is whether building a new structure at that moment is the most appropriate use of available resources.
The human desire for visible achievement
Human desire largely influences decisions about the most appropriate use of available resources.
Building a new structure is more visible than maintenance, and because we tend to choose the more visible option as evidence of achievement, we are inclined to choose it.
A pastor wishes to leave something tangible behind after years of service in a place. People naturally like to see the results of their generosity. A donor may prefer to construct a chapel or grotto in honour of a family member or in thanksgiving to God, and be remembered for it. Such remembrance is hidden when the money is used for maintenance.
Hence, a difficulty arises in balancing this human desire and pastoral priorities. This difficulty stems from a mentality that views development primarily as building something new. There are instances of parishes constructing a new grotto and a chapel, while the main church building or even the father’s house needs serious maintenance. In some cases, a parish compound is dotted with buildings that become increasingly expensive to maintain and take up space that could have been used for parking, green space, or open areas for pastoral activities. Sadly, in some cases, several buildings are constructed in a disorganised way, resulting in mismanaged space.
It is indeed difficult to move beyond the human instinct and desire for positive valuation. Yet, as pastors, we must manage the Church’s finances with logic rather than emotion to sustain the Church and foster pastoral fruitfulness over time.
This is where pastoral stewardship comes into play. A donor who wants to build a grotto or chapel can be encouraged instead to repair an existing structure, establish a maintenance reserve for the parish, or support another pressing pastoral need. The purpose is not to discourage generosity but to direct it towards pastoral priorities.
This is not easy. Yet, catechesis that gifts to God are not necessarily tied to constructing a new structure, and the pastor’s honesty in not initiating the conversation that a new structure is the ideal, can go a long way toward convincing donors to support maintenance. With many Nigerians travelling globally and comparing church buildings abroad with those in Nigeria, this will be easier.
Moreover, the need for maintenance is not limited to Church buildings. One recalls the August 2026 incident in which travellers spent several days on the Benin-Asaba highway, demonstrating the human and economic costs of allowing existing infrastructure to deteriorate. One can apply this to the Church. Here, while new infrastructure may be attractive and pastorally visible, maintaining existing infrastructure can sometimes enable greater pastoral fruitfulness.
Consequently, one notes that the number of buildings a pastor constructs during his tenure should not be the only measure of his fruitfulness. Instead, one should also consider his proper stewardship of the ecclesiastical goods entrusted to his care, including maintaining existing buildings and managing resources to promote and sustain pastoral mission.
Building with maintenance in mind
This raises a question that should always come up, even as we construct. Maintenance should be considered from the outset of a major building project, as a building can remain unfinished yet still require maintenance. This early preparation helps with planning and even with the choice of building materials. It helps the institution establish maintenance costs early, even as the building is being constructed. This is because while the building is still under construction, deteriorating parts should not be allowed to continue deteriorating. For instance, it is very common to see regular worship in a roofed but incomplete church. Roof leaks here will require immediate repairs, even though the church is not yet complete.
Since ecclesial buildings often outlive the people who build them, maintenance requires stewardship across generations. A pastor choosing building materials should prioritise durability over low cost to finish quickly during his tenure. This often leads to an immediate need for maintenance by the next pastor. A generation should not build a structure that leaves the next generation with an unreasonable burden, something that could have been delayed.
At the same time, the next generation should not automatically regard a project initiated by its predecessors as irrelevant or unnecessary because it was not its own vision. Decisions made in history were influenced by the signs and events of the time. Evaluating them solely by the circumstances of our own era can be anachronistic. What is required is continuity of stewardship, in which each generation uses an ecclesial building for the mission, maintains it, and hands it over to those who come after.
Conclusion
The Church in Nigeria has developed a progressive construction strategy in which projects are often begun before all the funds required for completion are available. While this strategy has been largely effective, the human desire for visible achievement through new projects can undermine the responsibility for the less visible task of maintaining existing infrastructure.
Maintenance is not the absence of development; it is the preservation of development already achieved. Hence, as effective stewards of Church resources, pastors need to distinguish between a project that is valuable because it serves a pastoral need and one undertaken to demonstrate visible evidence of achievement.
Next week’s post begins the discussion on the remuneration and social welfare of priests.
May God continue to help us🙏🏾
K’ọdị🙋🏾♂️
