Words have meaning. Well, unless you are into the verbal gymnastics of the postmodern extreme. Dirt does not mean water, chalk does not mean cheese, and alkaline battery does not mean maple tree. It is because words have meaning that we should take care in how we use them when speaking on the mission of God, and it is because words have meaning that we should use intentional language to involve all of God's people in all of God's mission.
Words build and words destroy. Words cast vision and words halt progress. And words have the ability to lead toward a preferred future.
In church life, some words have become so codified that they may as well form a second Decalogue. Come forward, Bow your heads and close your eyes and the like are pregnant with both intended and unintended meaning. If we are to involve all of God's people in all of God's mission, we need to ensure that our articulations match our intentions.
Two decades ago, Lesslie Newbigin wisely reminded us of the need to consider context in language: "In some cultures a dog is seen as a member of the household and an object of affection; in others it is primarily a scavenger and an object of contempt. The word 'dog' has distinctly different meanings in the two cultures, and the full meaning of the word can never be exhaustively specified" (The Gospel in a Pluralist Society). In the same way that the context of dog has to be explored, the context of words like mission, missional, and global engagement must be explored and explained.
The second thing, therefore, that we need to involve all of God's people in all of God's mission is better language.


