Last Sunday several of our members asked me the same question, "What did you think of the ad?" They meant the ad for the Episcopal church printed in the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram. If you haven't seen it, it says that serving others is another way of praying and that you can come and help slice carrots at an Episcopal Church. This ad among a few others had already generated some comments on the House of Bishops/Deputies listserv, so I was already curious to see some samples. What do I think of the ad?
First, I would want to commend whoever was responsible, I don't think it was the Diocese of Ft. Worth, for placing the ad. One continuing problem for TEC is that we have almost no "public profile" at all. Public Profile is what non-Episcopalians especially unchurched people think of us. In numerous survey's when asked about TEC, the most frequent response is nothing. Hard as it is for Episcopalians with our precious preoccupation with ourselves to believe, we don't read on most people's radar screen. They don't really know what our churches are like. On the negative side, many do know that, as one fellow traveler said to me, "you folks are going through some sort of controversy aren't you?" We must acknowledge that controversy would not be a high value for those seeking a spiritual home. So at least SOME ad is better than nothing.
On the other hand, that is the problem. The ad said absolutely nothing about us. If we changed the name Episcopal Church and put in Red Cross, the ad would stand exactly as it is. When I worked for the Diocese of Texas, we got some excellent advise (we paid for it) from one of the top advertizing companies in Houston. They taught us a lot about the purpose of advertising before they helped us develop ads. Here is what I learned.
1. An ad is an opportunity for you to tell people clearly about your "product" or as we would say our ministry and mission. It would hold up a particular value or dynamic of our life that would attempt to speak to others. A very good example of this was an ad put together for TEC before General Convention 2003. It showed a chalice and bread on an altar and the camera panned back to show a women priest celebrating. The voice over than added, "in the Episcopal Church, we believe a woman's place is at the altar." It went on to say further that we welcomed women in all levels of leadership as a church. Like it or not, it was true and it said something about us while it also communicated our sacramental nature.
2. An ad also needs to have a clear target audience. Per the above example, the market was all those Christians who believed that women should be treated equally to men, which is about 99% of everyone 50 years of age or younger! A poor example from the above ad campaign was, IMHO, an ad that opened with Bach music and two very gothic doors being slowly opened. Behind the doors was a lecture containing one of those large lecture Bibles. The voice said, "Would you come to church if we promised not to throw the book at you?" This ad was poorly thought through as to its target audience. It is aimed, not at unchurched people, but at de-churched people, namely people fleeing or hurt by a church that applies the Bible harsh way. To see the problem with the ad, think about its effect upon unchurched people. If they were planning on attending a Mosque, what would you think if the Mosque advertised that they had the Koran but didn't take it too seriously! (Needless to say, the members of the Executive Council of TEC loved this one.) We know from studies of unchurched people that they expect Christian churches to have a Bible, read from it and apply it to life. (I hope to write about the effects of having so many de-churched people in our community at a later point.)
3. We learned that an ad did not create a need. Put another way, no one got up from watching the U.S. Open and went out an bought a Bridgestone DT golf ball. All the ad wants to do is create a link between the need and the brand. If I need some golf balls, I stop and think, "I'll try those new DT's. I've heard they travel further." This is the very important part of advertising, namely to connect need to a brand.
Now, if I apply these three criteria to the ad in question, what do I get. A. No clear product. B. No clear audience. C. No clear link between a need and the brand. So, I think it was "a nice try, but no cigar." I would close, however, by asking you what kind of ad should your Church place? Can you communicate your unique message? Do you know your prime target audience? And, can you create a link between the audiences need and your ministry and life?
Here is one of my favorites from the Diocese of Texas campaign. You see a picture of the moon. Along side it is a quotation in bold print, "One small step for man, one giant step for mankind." Below it was the name Neil Armstrong followed by the word "explorer." Below that a smaller print tag line, "Neil Armstrong found a spiritual home in the Episcopal Church, you could too." It had a product, and audience, and a link; spiritual home for adventurous (with the people we used, there were a lot of other words that worked here too) people! Of course, this may not be your congregation's message at all, which is why you will want your own congregation to advertize so that you can create your own "Public Profile."
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Anxiety
“Do not be anxious,” Jesus said. Without a doubt, Jesus’ wise advice to his disciples is also applicable to a congregation or community. Over the years, as I worked with congregations, I grew to have a greater appreciation for anxiety and its effects upon communities.
Directly said, anxious communities are reactive communities. Anxiety is an emotional state that is processed by our minds and bodies in the same way we react to fear. Emotionally, we click into “fight or flight.” We fight when we respond with conflict and when we attack others. We flee when we withdraw or avoid others. Some congregations that I worked with were so chronically anxious that they repeated sick and toxic behavior. For example, in congregations that others have called “Priest killers,” I have found that this destructive behavior toward clergy is a symptom of a deeper underlying anxiety.
When our congregation or community becomes anxious it becomes reactive. It is not very able to respond certainly not in creative ways. Things are viewed through the lens of either/or, black/white, right/wrong. People and events are measured as being for us or against us.
For some time now, I have tried to state as rationally and calmly as possible that TEC is a community that shows all the signs of an anxious and reactive community. The continuing polarization on issues related to human sexuality and the fight or flight posture of many of our leaders is strongly indicative of our plight. I further believe that our current tension and polarization has gone on for so long that we are in danger of becoming, if we are not already, a chronically anxious community without the inner resources to turn toward health and healing.
I should mention that when I try to say this, those strongly caught up in the reactivity usually respond in very negative ways. They argue for the rightness of their side, or the importance of “rights” or “belief.” I want to make it clear, before you hit the “comment” button to my blog that I am not saying that the issues on both sides are not important. I am saying that we are dealing with them poorly because we have become so reactive.
What we do know about reactivity is that reason and understanding are pushed aside by emotion and passion. One continuing example of this is the way Episcopal leaders talk about, and the terms we use to describe, those we “see on the other side.” (One rule of thumb that I learned as a consultant is always to use the terms and descriptions that people and groups use about themselves WITHOUT giving these a pejorative definition.)
Those who have read articles from me already know that I have said all this before. What I want to answer in my blog is this question that is seldom asked: “What are we anxious about?” In other words, what is driving our present anxiety? I would say that the answer to this is complex, but it is knowable if we stop and thing about it.
First of all, as a Church with strong connections to American culture, we are anxious about all the things our general society is anxious about. Try this for a starting list:
The Post-cold war transitional world community
9/11 and global terrorism, our incursion into Afghanistan, and our disastrous quagmire in Iraq
Globalization (which includes all of the above)
The changing definitions of humanity and human sexuality, which corresponds to the diminishing identity we once found in our tribe, race or national origin.
The rise of violence in our society
The complexity of our society
The tremendous changes brought about by technology, the internet and computers
The decline of the family as the basic unit of culture and the emergence of the peer community as its replacement
The explosive growth in our understanding of the Universe and the diminishing place we humans find in it
The consequences of our dependence upon carbon fuels and the results, be they global warming or $5.00 a gallon gasoline
Then as a church:
40 years of decline
The loss of our “English” identity and the Americanization of ECUSA
The change from being a New York and East Coast elitist Community into a more upper middle-class community post WWII
The changing and emerging power of women
The declining number of African-Americans and blue collar workers who represented our previous “diversity and inclusion.”
The failure of Anglo-Catholics, Evangelicals, and Charismatics to gain control of our community combined with the absolute control of our national leadership by Progressives
The use of a Prayer Book that does not create a common sense of language and community – too many options for that
An aging membership that remains highly educated, largely Anglo and that can’t find many ways to live out the diversity that we value so much
A lack of consensus as to the role and place of Anglicanism in North America and a growing tension with Anglicanism in the rest of the world
Add to these, Post-Christendom, Post-denominationalism, and Post-modernism and you get a lot of anxiety.
So, what are we to do? When I suggested in a previous post that it will be 2010 before we will have the opportunity to move beyond our present stuckness, one reader, Sarah, stated her opinion that this will go on much longer. It certainly could. The result of such on-going anxiety will be the essential demise of our community. Sure, a remnant will remain, but it will be the remnant so burned out and dysfunctional that it will have no future.
Or we could simply have it out by fight or flight. The 2009 General Convention could be an essential sweep of the issues even at the expense of our membership in the wider Anglican Community. I have certainly heard this attitude expressed by some Progressives. We could see the withdrawal of more leaders, congregations and even dioceses. We (and they) kid ourselves if we think that such flight does not affect those who leave. I think a few folks who have left have managed to move beyond our present situation, but most clearly have not.
The answer in another way is quite simple, keep engaged and refuse to either win or withdraw. This is not a very easy road to take, nor a very comfortable one. Finally, one way to survive this is to surrender “the illusion of control.” As I said in my sermon May 25th, most human beings greatly over-estimate what we can really control. Worse, in believing we can control, we only create greater anxiety in ourselves and in our communities. Here is my summary comment for myself and the church I love, “When control is the issue, Jesus has left the building!”
On a personal note, I will be away for several days attending my grandson’s graduation from High School in Seattle. So, now you can hit the comment button and I will respond (hopefully not react) when I return.
Directly said, anxious communities are reactive communities. Anxiety is an emotional state that is processed by our minds and bodies in the same way we react to fear. Emotionally, we click into “fight or flight.” We fight when we respond with conflict and when we attack others. We flee when we withdraw or avoid others. Some congregations that I worked with were so chronically anxious that they repeated sick and toxic behavior. For example, in congregations that others have called “Priest killers,” I have found that this destructive behavior toward clergy is a symptom of a deeper underlying anxiety.
When our congregation or community becomes anxious it becomes reactive. It is not very able to respond certainly not in creative ways. Things are viewed through the lens of either/or, black/white, right/wrong. People and events are measured as being for us or against us.
For some time now, I have tried to state as rationally and calmly as possible that TEC is a community that shows all the signs of an anxious and reactive community. The continuing polarization on issues related to human sexuality and the fight or flight posture of many of our leaders is strongly indicative of our plight. I further believe that our current tension and polarization has gone on for so long that we are in danger of becoming, if we are not already, a chronically anxious community without the inner resources to turn toward health and healing.
I should mention that when I try to say this, those strongly caught up in the reactivity usually respond in very negative ways. They argue for the rightness of their side, or the importance of “rights” or “belief.” I want to make it clear, before you hit the “comment” button to my blog that I am not saying that the issues on both sides are not important. I am saying that we are dealing with them poorly because we have become so reactive.
What we do know about reactivity is that reason and understanding are pushed aside by emotion and passion. One continuing example of this is the way Episcopal leaders talk about, and the terms we use to describe, those we “see on the other side.” (One rule of thumb that I learned as a consultant is always to use the terms and descriptions that people and groups use about themselves WITHOUT giving these a pejorative definition.)
Those who have read articles from me already know that I have said all this before. What I want to answer in my blog is this question that is seldom asked: “What are we anxious about?” In other words, what is driving our present anxiety? I would say that the answer to this is complex, but it is knowable if we stop and thing about it.
First of all, as a Church with strong connections to American culture, we are anxious about all the things our general society is anxious about. Try this for a starting list:
The Post-cold war transitional world community
9/11 and global terrorism, our incursion into Afghanistan, and our disastrous quagmire in Iraq
Globalization (which includes all of the above)
The changing definitions of humanity and human sexuality, which corresponds to the diminishing identity we once found in our tribe, race or national origin.
The rise of violence in our society
The complexity of our society
The tremendous changes brought about by technology, the internet and computers
The decline of the family as the basic unit of culture and the emergence of the peer community as its replacement
The explosive growth in our understanding of the Universe and the diminishing place we humans find in it
The consequences of our dependence upon carbon fuels and the results, be they global warming or $5.00 a gallon gasoline
Then as a church:
40 years of decline
The loss of our “English” identity and the Americanization of ECUSA
The change from being a New York and East Coast elitist Community into a more upper middle-class community post WWII
The changing and emerging power of women
The declining number of African-Americans and blue collar workers who represented our previous “diversity and inclusion.”
The failure of Anglo-Catholics, Evangelicals, and Charismatics to gain control of our community combined with the absolute control of our national leadership by Progressives
The use of a Prayer Book that does not create a common sense of language and community – too many options for that
An aging membership that remains highly educated, largely Anglo and that can’t find many ways to live out the diversity that we value so much
A lack of consensus as to the role and place of Anglicanism in North America and a growing tension with Anglicanism in the rest of the world
Add to these, Post-Christendom, Post-denominationalism, and Post-modernism and you get a lot of anxiety.
So, what are we to do? When I suggested in a previous post that it will be 2010 before we will have the opportunity to move beyond our present stuckness, one reader, Sarah, stated her opinion that this will go on much longer. It certainly could. The result of such on-going anxiety will be the essential demise of our community. Sure, a remnant will remain, but it will be the remnant so burned out and dysfunctional that it will have no future.
Or we could simply have it out by fight or flight. The 2009 General Convention could be an essential sweep of the issues even at the expense of our membership in the wider Anglican Community. I have certainly heard this attitude expressed by some Progressives. We could see the withdrawal of more leaders, congregations and even dioceses. We (and they) kid ourselves if we think that such flight does not affect those who leave. I think a few folks who have left have managed to move beyond our present situation, but most clearly have not.
The answer in another way is quite simple, keep engaged and refuse to either win or withdraw. This is not a very easy road to take, nor a very comfortable one. Finally, one way to survive this is to surrender “the illusion of control.” As I said in my sermon May 25th, most human beings greatly over-estimate what we can really control. Worse, in believing we can control, we only create greater anxiety in ourselves and in our communities. Here is my summary comment for myself and the church I love, “When control is the issue, Jesus has left the building!”
On a personal note, I will be away for several days attending my grandson’s graduation from High School in Seattle. So, now you can hit the comment button and I will respond (hopefully not react) when I return.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Conversation with the PB (Part I)
When our Presiding Bishop was in Dallas recently, I had a chance to talk to her about our work on the 2020 Taskforce together. When I told her that I was disappointed that I had not heard much on this from her, she told me a couple of things of interest to me.
First, she mentioned the reorganization of the National Church Staff and the move of several offices to other parts of the country from NYC (more on this issue in a later post.) She also mentioned several other initiatives which connected to the eight 2020 areas. I was glad to hear this and incouraged her to speak more about these. It did not come up in her discussion with our clergy. We still remain publicly fixed on "the issues."
I would be the first to say that I think most of 2020 is dead in the water, but I continue to talk about these for two reasons. First, some day we will move beyond the current issues of sexuality and will want to go back to the mission of building the Church and making disciples for Jesus Christ. Second, I still believe that the eight areas expressed in the 2020 Report are the critical ones for the future - take for examples, reaching the new ethnic groups in the U.S. and developing younger ordained leaders.
How long will TEC continue to be dominated and pre-occupied by "the issues?" Until at least 2010. Remember two of my observations over the years: "Issues divide and Mission unites" and "In a polarized situation, the most strident voices dominate and moderate voices are pushed to the margins!" Sadly, this means that if I am right, we can expect our present unpleasantness will continue until at least 2010.
First, she mentioned the reorganization of the National Church Staff and the move of several offices to other parts of the country from NYC (more on this issue in a later post.) She also mentioned several other initiatives which connected to the eight 2020 areas. I was glad to hear this and incouraged her to speak more about these. It did not come up in her discussion with our clergy. We still remain publicly fixed on "the issues."
I would be the first to say that I think most of 2020 is dead in the water, but I continue to talk about these for two reasons. First, some day we will move beyond the current issues of sexuality and will want to go back to the mission of building the Church and making disciples for Jesus Christ. Second, I still believe that the eight areas expressed in the 2020 Report are the critical ones for the future - take for examples, reaching the new ethnic groups in the U.S. and developing younger ordained leaders.
How long will TEC continue to be dominated and pre-occupied by "the issues?" Until at least 2010. Remember two of my observations over the years: "Issues divide and Mission unites" and "In a polarized situation, the most strident voices dominate and moderate voices are pushed to the margins!" Sadly, this means that if I am right, we can expect our present unpleasantness will continue until at least 2010.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Welcome
I have served the Church as a Priest for 37 years, having served four congregations, two non-profits, and as canon for congregational development in the Diocese of Texas. This blog is a place for me to share my thoughts and reflections on issues before the wider church. Much of my perspective comes as a long time teacher and consultant and as a member of the initial 2020 Taskforce of the Episcopal Church.
I would like to invite those who care for and love the Church to respond and engage me in conversation.
Kevin
I would like to invite those who care for and love the Church to respond and engage me in conversation.
Kevin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)