What is in Kelvin's Head?

10 ways to make church websites better

04/11/2013

1 Include what time the services are and how to get there. If you are making big plans for a festival then make big plans to put it online. Some churches appear to have given up celebrating Christmas if you read their websites. (And remember, people do read websites and most read little else).

2 Have things that are up to date. And only things that are up to date. That means today’s date.

3 Say what the worship is like. Remember in your writing for the web that feelings matter.

4 Use a design which reflects and promotes the ethos of the church. (Pay for it if you must, but really, you needn’t).

5 Think about how to describe what it is like to worship there for the first time.

6 Include some details about the stuff you do that isn’t worship but remember to work out which is icing and which is cake.

7 Have details right there on the front page about which church denominations around the world that you are in communion with and which you are not in communion with, if you think such information is going to make other people come to your church. (Hint: I don’t.)

8 Collect good pics of people doing things and ask around to see whether people think they might be a better introduction to your church than a tired “Welcome From the Rector” message that never changes.

9 Video is good but needs to be refreshed. Every week, if not more often. (Yes, really).

10 Try praying this prayer in your intercessions for a couple of weeks in church and see if God answers your prayer: “Help us O Lord, to build a website that reflects how wonderful we think you are”.

church, church websites, communication

7 responses to “Well-meaning but homophobic”

June Butler

26/08/2014

Seems to me “well-meaning but homophobic” in these days and times implies vincible ignorance and is no longer useful as an excuse for homophobic language. The leaders of the C of E seem paralyzed, unable to articulate policies to move forward on equality for LGTB persons that are other than laughable. Think “deer in the headlights”.

Reply
Lawrence Rosenfeld

26/08/2014

I suppose @RevArun might say that women are welcome for the same reason, eh?

Reply
1. margaret of the sea of galilee
  
  27/08/2014
  
  Exactly what I thought.
  
  Reply
Kelvin

26/08/2014

I’ve removed a previous comment. I’d prefer to retain the focus on the institutional elements of this rather than speculating about an individual.

Reply
Dharma Nicodemus Cuthbert

26/08/2014

As society changes many people are not sure of the new, and therefore condemn it, without thought. I am safe, with the Devil l know. It’s a way of life, not dealing with changes. If we think about how much has changed; homosexuality was illegal until 1969 in England; Scotland caught up in 1983; women have a right to equal pay; the only job that is still excluded from them is working down a mine:
There are men who are prepared to wait to see a male doctor, especially if it is the genitals.
Racism is not tolerated by most, but it is still used by people who want a reaction. There was, when the world and I were young, a shoe polish, called nigger brown. This wasn’t considered at the time as being wrong.

Reply
John O’Leary

27/08/2014

I take your point, and I don’t disagree. If we look at another person and only see the gay part as ‘broken’, then that’s homophobic, no matter how well intentioned. Plus I always find something disturbingly patronising when people say ‘We’re all broken’, as if the speaker doesn’t quite believe it of him/herself, while seeing it very clearly in the other.

However, there’s another way of looking at it. The very fact that we are human means that we are broken. If being gay is part of that humanity, then it’s part also of that brokenness. It’s all part of the messy mixture that we struggle with, and build our rickety lives with, but for which we also should praise and thank God.

Reply
Allan Ronald

27/08/2014

‘Thinking Anglicans’ has a post up about Vicky Beeching’s coming out but does not link to the discussion here. I asked why but they did not reply let alone publish my question.

Reply