This BBC piece looks at church marketing.
At the moment my response is arrrrrggggghhhh!
CAN already has it’s Christmas campaign out.
I’m with Simon Jenkins on this.
“We collect them partly out of mischief,” says Jenkins, “but also to encourage churches to stop making an ass of themselves.”
It’s a good piece with an interesting response.
CAN insists the advertising makes a difference.
So, has advertising sold you into stepping into a church?
And if it has, how?
Search
Subscribe 
You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.
Related Entries
For blog design, Wordpress or MovableType coding or blog consulting, see cre8d design.
As a pastor, if I was going to advertise my church, I’d lay off the “church: it’s not as churchy as you think.” I would simply show images of church members engaged in active mission in the community: working at the soup kitchen, hospital visitation, reading to seniors, youth picking up trash in the park, etc, as well as some images of our joyful yet solemn worship service. Then simply have our church name.
Advertising itself is not the problem. Most of the ads I’ve seen are about the church and not about service to the community.
kgp
The problem I see with most church “marketing” is that it seems to relieve the church members of the responsibility (& joy) of personal invitation/ evangelism/ whatever. I think this is particularly true of my own anglican denomination. Ads are a substitute for a face to face conversation with my neighbour.
For me it is the content of the message not the so called marketing. I think the Jesus as Che thing is very sacreligious or even the other one with the child as Che. Che was or is a communist and to call either one that is terrible. I don’t mind marketing it is what the connent is and the message given. Heck, tracts of the 4 Spiritual laws is a form of marketing. Jesus “shared the Gospel” with others. Is this a form of marketing? Is Evangelism or the Great Commision what we are called to do marketing? If so what is wrong with it. Everyone says it is bad but they don’t give reasons why and when they do it contradicts so much what Christ teaches.
For me it is the content of the message not the so called marketing. I think the Jesus as Che thing is very sacreligious or even the other one with the child as Che. Che was or is a communist and to call either one that is terrible. I don’t mind marketing it is what the connent is and the message given. Heck, tracts of the 4 Spiritual laws is a form of marketing. Jesus “shared the Gospel” with others. Is this a form of marketing? Is Evangelism or the Great Commision what we are called to do marketing? If so what is wrong with it. Everyone says it is bad but they don’t give reasons why and when they do it contradicts so much what Christ teaches.
The “Jesus as Che” thing really bothers me. It’s rooted in a deep ignorance of who Che Guevara really was. While he was in charge of Cuba’s largest prison, he supervised the executions of countless people — many of them Christians. His philosophy was based on revolution through violence. Yes, to equate Che with Jesus Christ is sacreligious.
I agree with the comments from Joseph and Kevin. Over the past couple of years, I’ve been noticing more ‘church is fun’ advertising. Just this past week, I got a card in the mail from this church with image shown on the banner photo: http://www.panoramachurch.com/. (I’ve received similar marketing materials from other denominations.) Now I know folks who go to this church, but what am I to think? I’ll have fun here? I’ll get a date? Granted, our faith is part of all aspects of our life. However, this me-centric thing just seems like false advertising.