Why the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada could really benefit from a new name

 At least once a month I pick up the phone at the church office and the person on the other end says, "Hi, is this the Dee Eee Oh Lutheran Church?" I try to be polite.   I say, "Yes, this is Deo Lutheran church, Pastor Erik speaking."  "Oh, Day-o Lutheran?  Like the banana boat song?" I swear, someday when I've had too much caffeine I will snap back -  "No, Deo Lutheran, like the dative case of the Latin word meaning "to or towards God", as in "Gloria in Excelsis Deo".  I will undoubtedly regret this exceedingly geeky outburst when it finally happens.

The bulk mailings that we receive at the church also underscore that the second part of my church's name is a problem.  I've seen many creative spellings.  Luthern.  Luthrin. Lutheron.   But I graciously forgive these spelling mistakes, even though I was a city champion speller back in grade five (3rd and 4th place, b**ches).  I forgive partly because it is part of my job description to forgive, and partly because there is forensic evidence that the awesome guy who made the main sign out in front of my church building must have sinned LOUDLY when he realized there was no "O" in Lutheran after he had already finished carving all the letters on both sides of the 8'X4' cedar sign.

There is no "O" in Lutheran.

The word "church" in the name isn't without significant challenges either -- but let's save that for a different rant, because I've got another confession I want to make today.

Straight up: I am embarrassed by the name of my denomination.  I am grateful that my denomination's name was way too long to fit on our road sign, and that the acronym initialism "ELCIC" is all that appears there.  Because if our sign maker had had the space, I'd be be forced to explain to passers-by what the HECK the word "Evangelical" is doing there, assuming they hadn't already run away screaming with their hair on fire.

I'm tired of having to give a history lesson every time someone asks me "what does 'ELCIC' mean" in order to avoid losing people's respect the second I utter the word "Evangelical".   Yes, Martin Luther roundly hated the idea that the churches that had been cut off by corrupt mother Rome would be named after him.  He suggested "Evangelical" as a good name for the exiled church, after the greek word "evangelion" meaning "good news", and indeed, the church Luther instigated in Germany is presently called the Evangelische church.  The epithet "Lutheran" that was hurled by the enemies of Luther's movement in its early days was ultimately reappropriated by the church - it became an expression of intra-group siblinghood within the Lutheran subculture in a similar (but way less edgy) fashion to the way the "N-word" gained new usage in the late 20th century.  Hoping that the Lutherans would be motivated by their marginalized status to develop gangsta-hymnody or low-riding  liturgical wear?  Lutha' please!

What I'm trying to get at here is that the meanings of words do not remain static.  This is especially true in the case of words that are used as labels - there is constantly a tug-of-war being fought by people who wish to claim the right to apply them.  In the 16th century, "Lutheran" was a pejorative label, applied with the intent of convincing the reformers that they were foolish to hitch their wagon to an ass like Luther.   Today, it's a term that is spoken with (occasionally justified) pride.   In similar fashion, the "N-word" was a label used to shame and subdue a huge number of people.  Today, it is used by urban youth in a way that subverts the old meaning to such an extent that it is now self-applied by white kids.

As for this other label, "Evangelical" -- I'd argue that outside of academic cloisters and other circles of church geeks -- this word no longer means what it is supposed to mean.  When the general public hears the word "Evangelical", they do not associate it with the Good News that Jesus taught and for which Jesus died.  They are more likely to associate it primarily with the antics of the American Christian Right, whose message is often completely at odds with the Good News, and which seems to spray a new layer of skubala (Philippians 3:8) on the word "Evangelical" every time there is a Republican primary or American general election.    

The "Evangelical" brand name has been irreparably damaged by these associations.  Personally, I think it is time for our church to abandon this label altogether.  I'm also certain that there are many "Evangelicals" (in the new sense of the word) who would similarly be relieved to be no longer associated with us, due to our "liberal theology" that is so crass as to require that we work and advocate for the welfare of the "least of these who are members of [the Lord's] family" by any and all available means.

Let the others have the label.  It was getting awfully smelly anyway.

I leave it to someone else to choose an alternative label for us.  Any number of things could work - but my strong preference would be that it could be easily understood, pronounced, and spelled.  Otherwise, I don't think the label really matters, as long is it is not a barrier to our continuing to be an "Evangelical" church in the original sense of the word, ie. a community that is defined by, motivated by, and committed to the same Gospel that Jesus proclaimed in life, stuck with until death, and added a great many exclamation points to when he was resurrected.