I was so excited yesterday when I got another letter personally signed by James Dobson. Okay, so it wasn’t really signed by him, a computer did that, and; for the record, I was not excited to get more junk mail. All kidding aside, we all understand the concept of mass marketing and computer generated signatures. There is no harm in this practice because everyone inows that Mr. Dobson cannot personally sign 100,00 letters. Now, with that common frame of reference, let me move on to contrast a very different kind of mass-communication.
I was recently at a conference where a pastor of a large, and fast growing, church described his methods of assimilation. He described how people were asked to hand-write letters to visitors and then these people would sign the pastor’s name. Maybe I overreacted, but I was shocked! I wanted to raise my hand and say, “excuse me, but did I just hear you right?” Unlike mass mail described above, the person reading this hand written and hand “signed” postcard would have no way of knowing that the pastor did not write it.
The name of the pastor who implements this practice is not important. I think he is a good man and I respect his leadership. Instead of focusing in on one guy, let’s take this opportunity for a little self-examination.
Is this an effective way to do follow-up, or is it deception?
Is this something you, as a pastor or leader, would do? Why or why not?
If you got a letter like this, and found out it was not really from your pastor, how would you respond?
What other “acceptable” practices might we leaders use that cross the line?
Regarding 
Regarding 
Regarding 
Regarding 
Regarding 
Like pastors having their secretaries sort through their emails and sometimes respond?
What bugs me about that is when an email (or letter) is sent, it is sent in confidence– the assumption is that the addressee is the only person that is going to read it. Instead, while the pastor may eventually see it (if it’s deemed “important”), he isn’t the first one to open it.
Okay, stepping off my soap box now
I see your point but I don’t understand why it is necessary to ridicule James Dobson in order to make your point. I believe that it is difficult to sling mud at others without getting yourself dirty. Before you accuse others of crossing the line, be sure that you are not crossing it yourself.
Tux, you misunderstood the point about Dobson. I see nothing wrong in sending out mass mail, as he does, because everyone knows that it is just a computer generated with computer signatures. There is no cultural or intended deception in mass mail like the kind I get from James Dobson.
My questions were regarding the second practice of hand written hand signed cards. In the second case, I did not mention any names for the very reason you suggest.
Again, the Dobson letter is an example from something we all understand and accept. I am using that as a starting point to discuss a different issue. The point of the post is to look inward first and not at anyone else.
I hope that helps clear up your confusion about Dobson.
I understood that your criticism was about faked personal responses from a pastor. But my criticism of your criticism was about why you needed to use Dr. Dobson’s good name at all. I wanted you to consider what forest fires could be lit by a critical tongue. I agree that fake responses are disingenuous. But there are worse things. I have witnessed a church split into pieces over similar words. It’s best to walk softly and leave the big stick at home over matters of limited importance in the grand scheme of things.
Tux, all I can say is thanks for sharing your opinion. I have tried to rewrite portions of the post to address your concern and make clear the exact issue at hand. Thanks again for taking the time to share. I hope your criticism has made for a better post.
Joe, I agree with you that the first example of communication is acceptable and the latter is not. I don’t understand why Tux is upset, since you didn’t even criticize Dobson. And, even if you were to scrutinize Dobson, are Christian leaders above critisism?
Tux is upset because he thinks you are publically criticizing Dobson, and so he decideds to publically critize you. That is called hypocrisy and he should apologize for holding you to a (false) standard that he doesn’t hold himself to.