Buzzword Confusion

I know words are important. They can create mental pictures, provide clarification, heal and encourage. Words can also tear down, destroy, confuse, and complicate matters. Words can also become critical labels of disdain by one group and viewed as a banner of courage by another group. The theological landscape of Western evangelicals has always been a playground for word wars, but lately I've become concerned about the confusion and conflict generated in the latest word war. Hang on, I'm getting to the specific word.

15-20 years ago the buzzword in these discussions was the word "contemporary". It became a lightning rod for discussions on worship, but soon expanded to describe much more than worship. Conversants were reduced to assigning the labels of "contemporary" or "traditional". Twenty years later, can anyone tell me what these words really mean? They are confusing terms because what a person identifies as "contemporary" in one part of the country, or among a particular demographic does not mean the same in another state, region or demographic.

The conversation became so blurred that another word became necessary. "Post-modern" became the new buzzword. "Post-modern" pushed the conversation beyond worship descriptions and opened the pantry to discuss theology, movements, demographics, values and approaches. The "post-modern" discussion, though not new, has become more popular and been in full force for about 10-15 years. While I would consider myself well-read on the word, I still am not sure what people mean by it. Again, to one group or individual it means something totally different. You get the idea. Sometimes words, even those used to clarify become confusing. Get ready here comes the word.

The blurred or confusing buzzword today is the word "emerging". The word isn't confined to conversations about the church. It is a corporate buzzword as well. Much like previous buzzwords (e.g., quality, mission, values, and culture), "emerging" is something people, groups or organizations long to be identified as, or they consider it derogatory. My purpose isn't to define the word and it's present meaning. Others have done a much better job of that. Business types might prefer to "Google" the word with the likes of Seth Godin, Jim Collins or Patrick Lencioni. For a primer on the word in Christian circles, scholar Scot McKnight has really captured the conversation surrounding it in Christian circles. Check out the article at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/february/11.35.html

Is anyone else weary of buzzwords? In the 80's it was "excellence" ala Tom Peters and the Disney corporation. Then it shifted to "values". And in the early 90's it was "mission" and on and on it goes. The problem with adopting these words to describe our church, business, or organization is the confusion created when we accept the label. Just the mention of the word in some conversations gets the door slammed by closed minds. Others adopt the same word and you begin to distance yourself from it because their interpretation is not anywhere close to yours. Don't believe me? Say the following words and see if mental images of your definition don't play on your mind's flatscreen: conservative; evangelical; liberal; fundamental. I know one thing, buzzwords sure sell a lot of books, and generate lucrative conference revenues, as well as significant website and blog traffic.

If the Early Church is our model for living out a biblical community in the 21st Century, what buzzword do we use? I can hardly imagine Peter and John getting together and saying, "Hey, why don't we call ourselves 'emerging'? No, what about missional? Or authentic?" I think the apostles and early Christians could care less about descriptions, titles and buzzwords. In fact, the "what" was probably insignificant to them, but the "who" was absolutely critical. Their movement was rooted and based in the person of Jesus Christ.

I'm not saying "conservative, emerging, post-modern, or evangelical" label wearer's aren't following, or are rooted in the person of Christ. Please don't start that rumor and tag me with that label. However, I am saying that we (Christ-followers) need to be less concerned with conversations about "what" we are, than "who" we are following. If we focus on Christ and make Him the centerpiece of our lives, families, organizations, churches and groups, people will be drawn to Him. When we adopt a label (even though it's not the intent) we become synonymous with perceived leaders who trumpet, or criticize the buzzword. I'm not out to be identified as Bryan McLaren, Erwin McManus, Al Mohler, or Marva Dawn. That's nothing against each of these who have become powerful voices for various groups, organizations, causes and discussions. I would simply rather have my church and my life identified as being Christ-centered. Perhaps in a culture so dependent upon words, it's impossible in the 21st Century, but I think it's worth a shot. I know it's the greatest challenge we can ever face and accept.

You can bet that a single mother raising children on a minimum wage, or a man battling chemical addiction could care less whether we are "emerging", "post-modern", "conservative", etc. They simply need our help, love, encouragement and the One we follow, Jesus Christ.