Have you ever been frustrated at being excluded from something because you cannot access the specialist language? Olympic track cycling presents this frustration for me. Every four years, I excitedly tune in to enjoy what strikes me as a gripping event, but every time, my inability to distinguish my\u00a0keirins from my madisons, to mention nothing of the omniums (these are actual names of track cycling events) leaves me feeling angry that I can\u2019t understand. More than that, the commentators seem to be in on the conspiracy to keep me in the dark. They consistently make no effort to explain the terminology, apparently revelling in the ease with which they can use the specialist terms, to the exclusion of anyone who doesn\u2019t understand! Grrrrr!!!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Life can feel like this too! For those of us who work, we can often be guilty of using language that makes no sense whatsoever to those on the outside of the elite few who are privileged to be \u2018in the know\u2019. I work in a school, and they must be some of the worst places for this. Everything seems to have an acronym or a specialist \u2018eduspeak\u2019 term that means nothing to anybody in the real world. To some extent this serves a purpose at work, but it starts to become a huge problem when it creeps into the church. How many people are we excluding from God\u2019s Kingdom before we even start, simply because we have given no thought to our exclusive language? It starts with how we name our buildings: \u201cBlood of the lamb tabernacle\u201d is an actual name of a church in my part of the world. How must the average man on the street react to this? The mind boggles! It hardly encourages people to come inside! And our services themselves aren\u2019t much better. We talk of the \u201cagnus dei\u201d and the \u201ckyrie eleison\u201d. This sounds almost like a velodrome cycling event itself \u2013 or am I getting mixed up with the keirins again? Even relatively neutral terms like \u2018intercessions\u2019 can create blank expressions when read for the first time in our service books. \u2018Prayers\u2019 would seem like a much better word for the unchurched. Jesus always seemed to say what he meant and he certainly meant what he said. He called a spade a spade. He knew his audience and adjusted his language accordingly. When talking to farmers, he\u2019d tell stories about farming, fisherman would be told about nets, and be instructed to \u2018fish for men\u2019 etc. But when talking to the religious scholars, Jesus would routinely blow their minds with his technical expertise and, no doubt, the ease with which he was able to use the specialist terminology \u2013 even at the age of 12! Let us all commit again to communicating in simple language. May we be intentional in living as men who do not hide behind words that we know others cannot access just to prove some kind of silly point. Above all, may our language always point to the one who is himself the living word. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201c\u2026.but let your yes be yes and your no be no, that you may not fall under condemnation.\u201d <\/p>James 5:12<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Image Credit: Simon Connellan<\/a><\/p>\n
<\/div>