What's In A Church Name?

We usually drive when we go to my parent's home in Florida. They live in the Florida panhandle, so it's about a 14-15 hour drive when the whole family goes. I made it in approx 13 hours once when I went by myself--not nearly as many potty stops. Anyhooo, along the route we go (Tulsa-Arkansas-corner of Louisiana-Mississippi-panhandle of Alabama-Florida), we pass through some pretty small towns; some of them REALLY small. What's interesting is to see some of the names of the churches in those small towns. Like any good small town, there are always at least two churches--one for each corner.

There is the usual First [Second, and even Third] Baptist, First [United] Medodist, First Assembly of God. There are quite a few A.M.E. churches along the way, especially in the lower parts of Arkansas. Some of the church names are a little more creative or out of the ordinary than others. Mt. Zion Baptist Church seems to be pretty popular. Mount Sinai Missionary Baptist Church is another good one. There's Morning Star Baptist, St. Peter and St. Paul AME churches (I hope one is not robbing one to pay the other). I even heard of one church in Arkansas called Lily of the Valley Church of God in Christ--that pretty much covers it! One of my favorite church names is King Solomon Baptist Church. I don't know, but I just have an aversion to naming a church after a known womanizer.

So what does the name of a church say about its congregants? What does it say about the church's doctrine or beliefs. The Baptist, Methodist, AG, or AME churches should be pretty easy. But what about the more obscure names. The trend lately seems to be finding a name that still sorta says "church," but doesn't really commit to any one system of theology/doctrine. I'm talking about churches named "Woodlake-A Christian Community" or "Compass Pointe Fellowship." There's one church named "Oak Leaf Church" (they went ahead and used the "C" word); I heard they refer to the church as "The Leaf." Hmmm. I wonder if I can find a church named "The Bark" or "The Stone" or...I digress.

I'm thinking about all this church name stuff because I recently encountered a church--whose privacy I will respect because they obviously WANT to remain anonymous (you'll see in a minute)--that exercises an interesting "method" regarding their name. It all started when I stumbled upon this church's website. They were planning a big Easter service, complete with easter egg hunt for the kiddos AND a motorcycle to be given away to one lucky adult attendee! The church name, [-----] Christian Church, implied the congregation was part of what is known as the Restoration Movement (Christian Church/Churches of Christ) churches. I recognized that several of the staff had attend CC colleges. When I checked out their "what we believe" page, I noticed a couple of things that appeared to be missing.

If you know anything about CC's, you know that they refer to themselves as New Testament churches or sometimes Bible Churches. They have no national governing body and no national convention where they "vote" on resolutions, etc. A couple of things they do believe is that baptism is not only an integral part of salvation, it is THE point and time in which one receives the gift of the Holy Spirit. In fact, you rarely hear of someone being "saved" in a CC; they are "baptized." The words are used interchangably because they believe baptism is the point and time one IS saved. They also believe that an individual can lose their salvation. I've heard some refer to it as "divorcing" God--simply deciding one does not want to be saved any longer. Neither of these things were mentioned on the website. (Just for the record, I attended a CC for 16 years; even served as an Elder before leaving four years ago. I never believed either of these doctrines. I just attended the church because it was the one my wife was raised in. I eventually grew weary of their infatuation with Rick Warren and Bill Hybels.)

So I contacted the church and asked if they were indeed affiliated with the Restoration Churches and if so, was the omission of the two "doctrines" I mentioned above intentional. Their response? "Yes, are a Restoration Movement church and yes, those doctrines were purposely omitted from the website." Why? "Several of our staff lean more toward 'Baptist' doctrines/beliefs.'"

My question is: How can you say you're part of a church/organization, but are not willing to publicly align yourself with their historically accepted doctrines? The answer: contextualization. It's all about making yourself as appealing as possible so that you don't offend or scare anybody off. It obviously works.