concern for public relations, believes what he said over the long cam paign trail. Christians face the same malady. We want so despeartely to be liked — perhaps in our best moments, even to be effective in witness — that we will do most anything to identify with the group we want to impress. Whether it’s wide lapels, long hair, harvest dresses, the right car model, the “ in” church, the latest book, music, seminars, or catchy phrases in our language, we are ready to adopt or adapt. We are all trapped in this game of identification. For if we decide to turn our back on the culture of our day, what era do we adopt? No matter which decade we select, our life style will still present a message. We will still identify with some and burn bridges with others. Our line of thought thus far has been based, as we noted in our second paragraph, on “ popular” thought. The popular concept of iden tification urges us to study those whom we would influence and adopt at least some aspects of their pattern of life; or at least to openly show our appreciation for those features of their life we can praise. This, I believe, is a poor substitute for identification. Kenneth Burke, a contemporary scholar interested in communication, has discussed in detail this deeper level of identification. In adapting his ideas to our purposes, I would suggest that identification is best found on the level of commitment; not the popular surface accommodations that we all too often pass off as evidence of unity. To Burke, you don’t have to look alive or even talk alive to be united Page 5
Made with FlippingBook Online document