Tennessean.com has an article about branding and churches:
Frustrated that the Episcopal Church’s battles over doctrine and sex were turning off newcomers, the former members of Holy Cross decided, in essence, to switch brands. No longer Episcopalians, they were now Anglicans, allied with more conservative believers in Uganda.Once reserved for consumer products like Coca Cola or Doritos, branding has become increasingly important in the God business. Churches, old and new, are using branding to define their theology, attract newcomers and get their message out.
“It gives us a new identity,” Richardson said. “The Anglican Church does not have the baggage that the Episcopal Church has at this time. It speaks of a deeper tradition and a more biblically grounded faith.”
Closer to my heart is the word “Baptist.” Say it to a hundred people and it might invoke a hundred different reactions. Without getting too Derrida on y’all: one can wave the dictionary around all one wants, but if a word has a connotation in the surrounding culture its meaning will often be misconstrued.
Take the word “awesome” for another example. In some circles this is a special word reserved for God and God alone. In others: ice cream, haircuts, and iPods can inspire ecstatic fits of awe. If your church has over two hundred people chances are that every word in its name, vision statement, and mission statement has been debated at some point. Heck, the color of your pews/chairs might have lost you a family or two.
All this is part of the branding process…
Maurilio Amorim, who runs a church-branding firm in Brentwood, says branding is a biblical activity. He points to the parable in Luke 14:16-23, about a man who threw a banquet. When none of the guests showed up, the man sent his servant to invite outsiders in.So Amorim helps churches creates Web sites, direct mail and other forms of branding to attract newcomers. “Branding and marketing is evangelism,” he said. “I don’t know what the difference is. You are compelling people, you are giving people a reason to come visit you.”
I recall murmurings of a name change at the church where I grew up. Never did happen, probably because of the necessary fight that would accompany such a change. And no one wanted that.
Has anyone been through a name change or rebranding with their church? Do you think that changing your church name because of perceived public opinion is okay? Is branding just a different form of evangelism?
(HT: TitusOneNine)
Loading ...
January 15, 2008 at 13:30
The last church I was in changed their name. I was on the committee that recomended a name change. I was also on at least two other committees that were appointed to investigate a name change before the committee that actually recommended a name change.
We changed our name because people had a different view of our denomination (and mostly thought we belonged to another denomination other than the one that we did). We also had a name that most people thought was geographically descriptive but wasn’t intended to be. So they looked for our church in another part of the neighborhood. But what we didn’t do is figure out what we really were as a church during the process. We became “Ellis Ave Church” which was descriptive of geography. But five years later the church never figured out who it was and have gone through three pastors in that time and churred through a lot of members and attenders.
It wasn’t about the name in this case. It was about the church.
January 15, 2008 at 15:26
If you need advertising and branding to draw people, then that’s what people will be drawn to. If you need a great band and hip crowd to capture people then if anything in that changes, people will look elsewhere. If you sell people a brand, then what they buy in to is a brand. Look at the massive percentage of “church growth” that is at the expense of other churches. Marketing like this draws people to the wrong things.
The lines about “if we get them in the door with [x program, slogan, music] then we can give them the message” is hooey. If people aren’t attracted to your message then you are a clanging cymbal.
If people “buy in” to your reason for being, then no matter what the trappings they’ll stay, because they are there for the core reason, not for the trappings.
The way to grow a church of true believers is to live the message and be Christ to people in your area. The way to get your “numbers” up is by advertising and branding.
Take your pick.
January 15, 2008 at 15:42
Our “Baptist” church recently merged with an independent Bible church in another town to become a “multi-site” church with a new non-denominational name.
The discussions were such that the name change was only part of the issue, but some of us felt for some time that the negative connotation of Baptist was and is an issue. We hope those who think a non-denom is wishy-washy theologically will look at our doctrinal statement and listen to our preaching.
It’s interesting that our pastor is strongly against “marketing campaigns,” but yes, our new identity was done with forethought and purpose. Many are excited with the new “identity” which accompanies the “old” mission.
Of course, it’s still up to the saints to live out our faith or our “marketing” will yield no fruit.
January 15, 2008 at 15:53
A significant number of Baptist churches in New England have changed their names to a more denominationally neutral title.
We are in an area of the country that is cultually and geographically a LONG way from the Bible belt – truly an American mission field.
Anything that would detract from people coming to Christ (including a name more associated with a culture from other parts of the USA) is fair game for a change.
Many SBC churches up here have changed to names like ”——Community Church”, without the word “Baptist”, although the Biblical foundation of the teaching inside remains the same.
In fact, one of the earliest SBC church established in New England (founded back in the early 1960s) was originally Screven Baptist Church and is now Seacoast Community Church.
January 15, 2008 at 16:47
What do you do when you are the only church in a small rural area or a certain denomination? You keep the name it has had when it was established, because for the most part everyone in the area knows what denomination it is and who goes there. With a new pastor and new ideas from someone just out of seminary, they the pastor and a few others wanted to change the name as to not offend the other small communities in the area. Battles have insued and will continue until a decision is made, (approximately two years now), but the name stays the same. Alot of people only want to be comfortable when they arive at church and to be told what to do. However, some of us who live for the time we will see our Lord and Savior face to face don’t really care what the name is. What is important is that you as a Christian plant the word of God heart deep into everyone you see and let it grow. In God’s Grace you know who.
January 16, 2008 at 00:25
We are trying to reach people for Christ. If the name of a church has baggage that causes people who don’t know Christ to avoid it, change it.
January 16, 2008 at 13:55
I wonder if this was a re-branding or a move to realign with the less polarizing branch of Anglicanism. The AMIA is based out of Rwanda and is a form of Anglicanism in the states that is less controversial than the EC.
If so, it isn’t really a re-branding.
There was a church in Orlando that did this about two years ago. It went from a homey kind of Baptist church to a cool church-of-what’s-happening-now kind of church. It was a disaster in terms of the people invested in the church. I think they probably lost about 70% of the original members. That’s not to say that it can’t be done well, though.
January 16, 2008 at 19:11
The Baptist faith was introduced to Virginia and North Carolina by missionaries from NEW ENGLAND during the Great Awakening, and from there it spread throughout the south, so don’t be too quick to change your name because you are “far from the Bible belt.” (Anglican pastors, who had licenses from the state to preach, used to call up the sheriff and go beat up the Baptist preachers at illegal open-air revivals.)
The original reason that Americans in the Anglican Church changed their name to Epsicopalian was to show their patriotism, Anglican being the official Church of England, the head of the Church being none other than King George III!
And as an American Baptist minister in Alderson, WV once said to me, “If you get two Baptists in a room, you have three opinions, but we can all share the same faith.”