OurChurch™

Last night we arrived home from Berlin with fifteen minutes to spare prior to going to a church meeting. One issue our church is currently discussing is whether the name of the church should be changed. Last night this wasn't a primary point of discussion but it was clear there is more than one strongly held feeling about this in our church community. My contribution to the discussion was to voice my opinion that a church name should not be considered to be a theological issue, but one of branding. The name of a church should say something, albeit briefly, to people outside the church.

Ironic therefore to read Dave's post of February 18th today, about branding churches. Dave is skeptical of the approach of this site. At that site they describe their approach here, and, talking of the people their re-branding of your church will reach, say:

This is deeply offensive. This is not what I was meaning when I said that I thought church names should be about branding. There is a lot of negative reaction out there to branding in some Christian movements. I don't fully buy those arguments, but I'll have to join that camp today as I look at this site. Doing things professionally is one thing, but taking a mercenary approach to spirituality is another. It is God who draws people to himself, not our branding. Hgggn.

I've uploaded today delayed coverage of our trip to Berlin. The Saturday and Sunday entries were written in Berlin, but on an obscure technology called paper. The Monday entry was genuine live report-from-the-field in an internet cafe round the corner from Checkpoint Charlie. Tuesday and Wednesday were shamelessly written sitting in bed this morning.  : )  Further update: Have now also uploaded an entry from Bronwyn for Monday (nice to have her blogging again) and added some images scattered through the trip. Full travel album to follow, eventually!