MorningWalk by Tom Ehrich
Marketplace Language April 13, 2011
I had an interesting exchange today with a Facebook connection who didn't like my use of marketplace language to reflect on church matters. I had written a piece about "customer service" and our need to do a better job of responding to people. He recoiled at the word "customer."
I understand that. My focus was on the word "service." But I can imagine many people not wanting to use words like "outcome," "accountability," "constituent," "marketing" and "lead generation" to consider a faith community's operations.
In general, I think we church people need to broaden our concepts, ideas, categories, tools and language. We need to get outside ourselves and to engage creatively with other people. To do that, we will need to ratchet down our in-house lingo. After all, there's nothing particularly holy about the ways we have been talking. Familiar, yes, and comfortable, but not holy and not necessarily any truer to God's nature.
What do you think?
FAITH Q & A
Q: Who deserves to "know the Truth"? Everybody? Some people?
A: I'm sure some Christians are convinced that only a small company of the select should have full access to God, namely, themselves and people like them. Keeping the many out has been a high priority for the few.
As I see it, if God's truth is what sets us free, then why would God intend only a few to be free and everyone else to be in bondage? That doesn't sound like our God. If God's true nature and true desires are an essential part of living into the fullness of our humanity, why would God intend only a few to be fully human and the rest to be subhuman?
That leaves the question, of course, of what we mean by "the truth." That opens another opportunity for exclusivity. But as I see it, the reality and nature and word and desires of God are all capable of being understood by children. Setting God's truth apart as something too complex and holy for most people seems to violate the Gospel.
by Jessica White on Apr 13, 2011 5:58pm
I find the same defensive response to these terms as I consult with churches. I've begun to think that part of the reason is that we want to separate our church life from our work life, because so many people seem to find little satisfaction in their work. In fact, I hear more and more how their personal lives are being affected by the stress created by the workplace. Perhaps leaving those terms behind is calming and freeing. Regardless of the words we use, we need to think in those more corp[orate terms if mainline denominations are going to survive. It seems our brothers and sisters in the mega, non-denominational churches have no problems with this thinking and they're growing rapidly.
by Jeffrey Wood on Apr 13, 2011 6:28pm
Son Adam's first job - Applebees. He gave me thr training handbook. Tempted to steal the words and write a handbook on evangelism. On making people feel welcome in church. If restaurant chains understand customer satisfaction, why not the church.
We are in the welcome business and aathough my annual IRS statement from the church sais, I did not receive any actual benefit from my donations, that is incorrect. I receive a great deal fom church participation. And I am not about to be a part of the life of a congregation if I know I am unwelcome.
Customer satisfaction rules!
by Amy Welin on Apr 13, 2011 6:39pm
While I would prefer to use language that reflects the sacramental nature of the work of the church, such as radical hospitality, I agree that we have not been especially keen on offering service to our members, especially those who are new and do not have a grasp on the traditional vocabulary (narthex? undercroft?). When you have to be an "insider" in order to be welcome, we are a private club and not church. And church is part of regular life - where customer service is important.
by Sara Sprecher on Apr 13, 2011 8:58pm
It certainly seems that here in Dallas, those mega-churches have figured out that doing the same things the same old ways has not worked, is not working & will not work. These churches, some of them denominationally allied have thought in those corporate terms & have marketed themselves & figured out how to reach their members & grow their membership.
I didn't like it much when as members of a healthcare team & business, we had to start thinking of things in those terms, but those terms work. Concepts such as ownership, accountability, internal customer service, external customer service actually made us think about our practices & make some changes to become more successful.
No, I don't want to become a "customer" in my church, but we must change our ways if we are to survive & thrive.
by Marketplace Language on Apr 13, 2011 9:05pm
Those of us who work in churches, judicatories, and faith-based organizations need to look for help and insights wherever we may find them! The tools of sociology, psychology, marketing, etc. can inform our efforts. We do not have to accept them without evaulation, but we should not accept theological arguments without careful consideration either.
by Jim High on Apr 13, 2011 10:54pm
I think Jesus would be horrified at the present day church, and even more so at all the various brands of the Christian Religion competing for members in his name. Is organized religion what Jesus preached, or preached against? Religion should be about how we live and treat one another, not about what we believe and who or what we worship.
by Carl Krusi on Apr 14, 2011 12:51am
I really think it's time for the church to dust off its often musty language.
We got rid of the thees and thous. probably there are other terms that we could reformulate.
by Alan Parker on Apr 14, 2011 7:27am
I have no great objection to use of 'customer' language in speaking of the work of the church; and, as has been observed, our own traditional language is arcane and not especially welcome.
That said, one of the problems that comes with customer language is that it supports the mentality of the customer, which has become that of 'consumer.' I think that 'consumer' is one of the most pernicious terms in our economic ecology; it assumes that people are, first and foremost, users of services.
As a pastor of a small church, I often feel as if at least a significant number of those who are part of our church family want to 'consume' worship; want to extract from the experience of church only that which feeds them. I know that church should feed people, and I don't particularly want to assign blame for a consumer culture in church. But a living, breathing faith community of faith does not, in my view, consist of deliverers on one side of the line and consumers on the other side. Each and every one of us both eats and is the body of Christ.
by John Albright on Apr 14, 2011 2:02pm
"Musty language" reminds me of my college Intro to Public Relations class 45 years ago. Propaganda, we learned, was a term coined in 1623 when Pope Gregory XV created the Congregation for Propagating the Faith in the aftermath of the Reformation. They began using what are now seen as classic PR strategies to persuade and inform people about the Church. The word ‘propaganda’ further expanded in 1629 when the Collegium de Propaganda began educating priests to work in foreign missions. I don't suggest we dust off that particular lingo for our work today, but we can appreciate that organized religion has always been in the process of re-organizing, adapting (or creatively renaming) whatever tools are at hand.