I was born with a label stuck to me. The doctor could easily see that scrawled on a sticky label on my back was the single word, “Amish.” From that, I’m sure he made quite a few assumptions about my life and potential.
Sometime during the first months of my life, that original label was pulled off by my parents and replaced with one “Mennonite.” The old label hadn’t yet stuck hard enough to rip my skin. Any observer would now make some different assumptions about me.
I wore that label in my childhood and teen years with a growing resistance to it. In my family’s world, the church denominational label was the uppermost in the list of identities pasted on my back. And I didn’t like it that way.
Even as a young adult leader, I tried sticking a generic label on my back. But when I wasn’t paying attention, people kept scribbling “Mennonite” on that blank label. It seemed impossible to replace it, given my involvements.
Does it provide critical information for others to know which denomination I belong to? Or, with which political label I would most closely identify?
In my view, our insistent use of labels and categories contributes to our difficulties in working together toward helpful outcomes. We don’t usually benefit much after deciding what label we wear, and it’s even less helpful after we decide what label the other wears.
Labels and categories often breed bias and misunderstandings. Oh yes, I realize that there can be some benefits. I’ve been around for a few years. I’ve heard all the logic behind the necessity for labels and categories.
Just take a bit to consider with me the high costs of what we consider normal in this regard.
- Obsession with preferred labels can get confused with a healthy sense of identity. It’s not the same concept.
- Our loyalty to labels and our allegiance to categories can severely limit our ability to learn new things and to grow beyond where we are.
- Labels make us think we already know what the other thinks, values, and lives.
- Labels are generally ways of organizing people into categories, so that we know how we should rank one another.
- Skin colour is also a type of label. We think we know what “they” are thinking.
Even though some of my hatred of labels was unhealthy, I sometimes just wanted to adopt something new—simply to confuse the predictable image.
Most importantly, I just wished we could actually talk openly about the issues, rather than just assuming that certain viewpoints belonged only to a certain label.
Do you get my frustration? Why are some valid questions and topics out of bounds—simply because they are associated with the wrong label?
In the Church environment, once a debatable issue is labeled “conservative”, “Reformed”, “charismatic”, “liberal”, “Anabaptist”—and the list is endless—we are severely limited, usually, in how we are able to consider the points of strength and the limitations.
It’s just the same with social and political environment: once an issue is labeled “conservative” or “liberal” or “capitalist” or “socialist”, we can’t seem to have any meaningful discussion about the critical points of the issue, or that issue’s effect on society.
We often feel compelled to stay at war with the other label, rather than really consider the critical issues—apart from the label.
Our go-to labels always float to the top: they select our vocabulary, stir our passions, design our memes, and limit our perspectives.
In case you now assume that I’m suggesting a vanilla, free-floating and relativist approach to theology, doctrine, and social issues just re-read the blog post “As We Are One…” You’ll better understand the basis of what I feel about the dangers of labels and categories.
My bottom-line appeal is that we of the Church can grow in our ability to consider discussions and debate and viewpoints on doctrinal and social issues on the merits of that issue’s components—not on the basis of which label that issue wears.
The end. I think. Of this series. But I’ll be thinking and writing something.
I agree. Well said. Sometimes labels tend to give us a feeling of superiority or inferiority when neither are necessary. Accepting my position in Christ helps me to put away a lot of labeling. To be known as a child of God gives me a greater sense of freedom than to be known as a Mennonite. I enjoy reading your blog.
Thanks for your comments.
As much as I dislike labels it’s been a way of explaining my doctrinal position. I see old habits are hard to break but I see I will have to give this some thoughtful thinking. What you believe doesn’t have to fit in a category just the scriptures. Thank you Merle very insightful.
Thanks for your feedback.
As an education major, we debated labels a lot. Autistic, gifted, ADHD, even “developmentally delayed,” etc. I’ve always been more on the anti-label side. Maybe it is better without them, but it seems to be a natural and even important way that we understand the world. We start our life sorting things under different labels–colors, animals (four legged animals are not all dogs), male/female. I think the problem is more in the value we place on the labels. The judgements we make based upon the labels are what do harm.
Growing up, you could label my brother autistic and me gifted. Everyone has the same thoughts reading that. One is good and one is bad. One label is valued and one is not. I refused to accept that label until adulthood and I still find it chaffing because people value it in ways they shouldn’t. I can’t stand the idea that I am somehow better than my brother.
Perhaps we can use less labels, but I don’t think they’re going away. We need to change the way we think about labels. Do people have the same value apart from their labels? Do they lose value by their label?
Can we work to follow the harder commands in scripture–to walk in love, to be peacemakers, to be compassionate–and use labels to understand people instead of devalue them? We will start making a difference after we accept that this is about people we need to love, not debates we need to win or issues we need to solve.
Thanks Mary. I know we can’t eliminate labels. My frustration is that in the context of doctrinal or political systems the general labels are so inadequate descriptively as to seem unhelpful. To illustrate: just ask anyone to describe an modern Anabaptist or a Democrat. But I do get your valid point.
This is convicting Merle, thank you. I do understand your frustrations too.