Tuesday, October 18, 2005

Whats in a name?

I'm pretty over all the different little titles and names that people try and give to new churches, it's like the whole music genre thing. In the past people pretty much just made music in the style they wanted, whatever they thought sounded good. It wasn't until music journalists started to try and describe the music to people that were reading about it in the paper, that people really got into classifying their music as a certain genre.

Now people have just gone overboard, with say house music-which is in itself a type of dance music, being further classified into another 10 or 12 styles. Now people pick up on the latest genre, then try and play that style of music, and so the name and style of the music dictates how the music will sound, instead of the main thing-the music, dictating terms.

I reckon it's the same with the emerging/postmodern/alternative worship/missional/house church thing. Just do whats most relevant to your people and who gives a crap what other people call it.

2 comments:

Matt Glover said...

The name you give yourself often says more about what you think of others than it does about what you do or who you are.

For instance, if you say you're a missional community, you're really saying that all the others churches around you are NOT missional. If you say you're charismatic, then all the others aren't etc.

Waste of breath really. Why not just call them all 'church' and be done with it. People that aren't christians don't care anyway.

I suspect God doesn't either.

Saerz said...

"... I suspect GOD doesn't either."
Great comment Matt. I doubt GOD does either; what we do / say / love seems far more interesting than what we call ourselves.