What is in a name? This question may be historical or literary, but it is also religious. What we choose to call the holy or God or the mystery is what it is for us.
When we name God “father,” we ascribed attributes to God based on our image of fatherhood. This might become problematic for those who had abusive fathers. Some people, then, find using father as a singular name for God limiting.
One of the premises of most religions is that we cannot really know God — that God is transcendent or above all else and, hence, unknowable. Some have said the more we know of God, the more we acknowledge we do not know. Nevertheless if we wish to have a personal relationship with God, we name God using concepts or terms that are familiar to us. In doing so, we ascribe human characteristics or attributes to the divine; and we therefore inadvertently set bounds around how we see God. We limit God.
What names do you use for God? By looking at what names we use, we can come to understand how we think about and define God. Do we use gender-specific names? Is God limited by gender? Do we use monarchical terminology that describes our God in relationship to empire or kingdom? Are our words inclusive?
This spring I taught a Bible class focusing on Genesis. In doing so, I became even more aware that how God is addressed is instructive in terms of how the people who compiled Genesis saw God. Depending on the source of the story at times, God was seen to be physically present, talking and walking with his new human creations. God loved, hated, got angry, and was disappointed with us. He was very human — more than human, yes, but depicted as having human-like attributes.
In other stories, God is not so physically present as he was imminent spiritually. In those situations, God was truly mysterious, acting in ways that humans did not immediately understand.
Our personal theology of the “power beyond understanding” is framed by the names we articulate for that power. Each of the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) has names within it that in large part are similar. Within each tradition, we select those names that resonate with us.
In the Islamic faith (and I do not pretend to be an expert in Islam), there is a mystical tradition called Sufism. One Sufi theologian, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058-1111), wrote a tract translated to mean “The Nintey-Nine Beautiful Names of God.” The 99 names of God are derived from the names used in the Quran. Al-Ghazali describes why names are important and how they reflect the qualities that we should try to emulate in our lives. Some of these names (translated) are the Infinitely Good, the Merciful, The Faithful, The Compeller, The Creator, The Producer (not as in movie, but rather a maker), The Provider, The Opener, the Omniscient, The All-Hearing. Obviously my list does not include all of the 99 names, but I want to provide a flavor of the qualities depicted.
Now let us consider Christian terminology — Creator, Merciful, Faithful, Omniscient are among the various names used. Lord, King, and Exalted One are used as well. Islam has those too.
In the Jewish Kabbalistic mystical tradition, there are 10 aspects of God (the Sefirot): Nothingness, Understanding, Wisdom, Power, Love, Beauty, Splendor, Eternity, Foundation and Presence. These names or attributes are translations and as such are less specific than those in Hebrew. Nevertheless, they describe those aspects of God that we lean toward when we think “God.”
My point here is that there are commonalities in how each of our faith traditions name God. Now let us consider what we personally name God. Which aspect or name or attribute of God do you reference most often? Father? Lord? Wisdom? Love? Eternity? When we relate to that which is most holy in our lives, the names we use describe our relationship.
After we have considered that link, might we then contemplate how that name or aspect is just a small fraction of what God is? I am not asking us to change how we address the Holy, but rather, consider augmenting that address.
I know that I cannot understand all that The Mystery is. I know that something beyond my ken exists and that I have felt the power and the love that is there. In some ways, I have stopped “naming” God’s aspects because it is apparent that I limit God’s possibilities by using a name with a particular attribute.
One principle in the faith tradition in which I minister is that each of us seeks our own truth. Some of us believe in a god within; some of us believe in a transcendent, yet omnipresent deity; some of us don’t believe in a god at all but believe in the spiritual. Ultimately, however, we all believe in something greater than the individual, be it community or intelligence or a deity. How we name whatever we believe describes our relationship to that belief. What we call God or The Mystery or Spirit limits us and our relationship to it. Might there be something even more? I happen to think so.
The Rev. Becky Gunn is minister of the Unitarian Universalist Society of Bangor. She may be reached at uubeckygunn@aol.com. Voices is a weekly commentary by Maine people who explore issues affecting spirituality and religious life.