As a theologian, I am interested in “God” and everything thereunto connected. No surprise here. I am supposed to articulate a discourse (logos, from which the desinence -logian) about the divinity (theos = God). And I do that a lot, sometimes in ways that are surprising to the people I talk to.
One time I was delivering a paper at an historians’ meeting, which dealt with 3rd-century Christian writers from a purely historical perspective. Once the people there assembled understood that I was not primarily an historian, but a theologian, they perked up from their slumber and one of them asked with incredulity: Do you really think about God as an existing reality? Well, it depends what do you mean by ‘existing’, I answered. They were undeterred. They became even more curious — at least some of them — and a lively conversation ensued.
When speaking in my capacity as a theologian, I always have to remember that the great majority of my interlocutors is projecting all sorts of things on the name “God.” Many take for granted that their notion of God is the correct one, whether they happen to believe in God’s “existence” or not. And when such a notion derives from their social context, without any personal engagement with it, the conversation becomes awkward.
Almost always, my problem is that I don’t agree on the premises of the conversation, that is, on the definition of God that is assumed. And when I state that I even have a problem with the fact that God can be defined, we often reach a stalemate.
Sometimes I look stupid, I know. Decades of studies about “something” that perhaps cannot even be defined. My escape route is to say that I study people’s religious experiences as historically constructed and manifested — which is true but it also circumvents the issue.
In the last fifty years or so, there have been in the academy several people who have offered solutions to my embarrassment. We have “atheologies” and “post-theism” for example. I have a lot of respect for all serious academic pursuits, but I feel that such solutions are not cutting through at all.
I feel stuck with God. Partly because it is God, and none other, that is being pulled and pushed to justify all kinds of political and moral systems. Partly because so many mystics belonging to my own tradition have defined their lives as a quest for the living God, a desire for God, and so on and so forth.
Matthew Fox has offered a very practical and non-academic way to look at the issue in his precious little book Naming the Unnameable: 89 Wonderful and Useful Names for God… Including the Unnameable God. The following is an excerpt from the book:
Meister Eckhart says God is the “Ineffable One” and the “Unnameable.” God is “without a name and is the denial of all names and has never been given a name—a truly hidden God.” Such a teaching allows us all to relax and to cease projecting and certainly to cease going to war against one another “in the name” of whatever God we do or do not worship. (Atheists too can get stuck and overly attached to the name “God.” Recently I heard this joke: “What I most dislike about atheists is that they are so busy talking about god all the time.”)
Who is this, what is this, that is without a name and whom we can never name? This “It” must be quite amazing because we humans are great at naming everything and anything that comes our way—but we need to cease naming and projecting when it comes to Divinity.
How eager we are to seize and to hold and to name and to categorize and to box up into concepts and then rules and then doctrines and then dogmas. But Whoa! Stop! This “God” thing does not yield to such human control compulsions. “God” is the one without a name who will never be given a name. Just being. And non-being. And silence. And….
Words fail us in the face of mystery. As Thich Nhat Hanh reminds us, “We know the Holy Spirit as energy and not as notions and words.” This is why our deepest feelings and experiences turn us to art and music and dance and silence in response to the Ineffable One.
Banner image: Light from the heavens. In Iceland. Photo by Davide Cantelli on Unsplash
Queries for Contemplation
How relevant do you think it is to talk about God in our troubled times? What kind of conversation would ensue if what Matthew says in this page is taken as the point of departure?
Related Readings by Matthew Fox
Naming the Unnameable: 89 Wonderful and Useful Names for God…Including the Unnameable God
A Way to God: Thomas Merton’s Creation Spirituality Journey
Meditations with Meister Eckhart: A Centering Book
Matthew Fox: Essential Writings on Creation Spirituality
10 thoughts on “God”
Good question. I think it’s more necessary to “think” about God rather than talking about God because, depending on the person or group of people in question, talking about God can not only be unproductive but argumentative. But to think about God, and to contemplate God, I believe should be a constant and tireless process. In the ultimate sense, what else is there or can there be to consider?
For a very long time I have chosen to refuse to use the word “God. It has been used to justify wars, injustice and cruelty of every kind.. lt is easier for me to know divinity as love given and received, love shared. It can be known as the light of inspiration, intuition and imagination that births creativity constantly. It can be most deeply felt in the joys and sorrows of life as a Presence and knowledge that we are never alone. What is the source of the tears that flow as we sing or hear a song or say a prayer that is so heartfelt? There are signs of the Holy One everyday and everywhere if we are open and pay attention.
Thank you Gianluigi for quoting Matthew’s remark that “Words fail us in the face of mystery.”
It is amazing how many debates are taking place about “God” without any of the debaters defining the word they argue so passionately about. Most of the time, we project our egocentric desires for infinite power and immortality on an anthropomorphic concept of God, thus endlessly feeding our ego’s frustration and missing the joy and privilege of partaking in the extraordinary and mysterious cosmic adventure of Life. I am convinced that if we talked less about “God” and spent more time focusing on accepting that, as Ernie Kurtz put it, we are “Not-God,” most debates about God would sound unnecessary and vain.
I love this conversation this morning because it prompts me to look at the challenges I face in having dialogue with people of different faiths, and with those who have no belief in a divine entity.I recently had a major falling out with a friend of 20 years. He is an atheist and we often had conversations about spirituality, religion, and God. He is well read in the mystics, but it wasn’t until the falling out that I realized his pursuits were more intellectual and not spiritual. More than once, I pointed out to him that the Christianity that he was rejecting and objecting to is not the Christianity that I know. I can see that he was projecting all of his negative experiences with religion onto a misguided notion of God. Ultimately, my friend made some very insensitive remarks, to which I unfortunately responded in a more definitive way by expressing my beliefs in a way that felt like I was “coming out“ as a Christian. I regret the injury to the relationship. I now look for guidelines in how to have constructive, loving conversations with people who have a different understanding, or who reject the notion of a divine source altogether.
I agree with Barbara and many mystics (especially Meister Eckhart) and saints of past and present genuine spiritual traditions that GOD IS BEING, mysteriously/ineffable a LIVING LOVING Creative Spirit/Energy/Consciousness that We’re All Unique Divine Co-Creative Parts/Sparks of in Our LOVING DIVERSE ONENESS with-in All physical/nonphysical spiritual beings/dimensions of Our Evolving CREATION~COSMOS in the Sacred Process/Flow of the ETERNAL PRESENT MOMENT….
In some cultures, it is believed that everyone has a secret “true” name, as well as a regular, use-name. To know someone’s “true” name gives one power over that person, so it is seldom revealed, except to a very trusted other. I find this concept laughable when it comes to knowing the Divine’s “true” name. There is no possibility of knowing that! It is a mystery that we will never pierce, so Matthew’s take on “the Unnameable God” rings true to me.
I am a Mystic — The same kind as Meister Eckhart.
I am also a woman.
So I am not supposed to exist, according to many.
But I do.
And I continue to speak of the Mystical Truth, which I directly experienced.
It is the same Mystical Revelation that is INTERPRETED within Plato, the Jewish Old Testament and the Kabbalah, JESUS and especially the prologue of John, the Gnostics, Plotinus, the Islamic Sufis, Meister Eckhart (and several others), the Upanishads, and many of the Hindu branches.
It is interpreted differently, but experienced the same.
The Experience is radical. It inspires reams of books that try to convey the ineffable within texts, but it still leaves out the Heart of the matter because there is NO WAY to convey something so un-like “ordinary” experience. So we turn to art, but art, the substance, cannot really convey the shocking Truth which is so beyond substance, beyond even ordinary conception.
I’ve left (many) brief descriptions in the comments sections of the archives, but they don’t tell the Grand Truth or even most of the story. (It was required to stay within very short space limits, and to stay on limited topics…and I was not always welcomed…)
But the texts are a start, and people can judge for themselves.
I also STRONGLY urge people to do additional reading on “Mysticism.” (Go to the sacred texts, not the popular drivel).
“God is hidden in all beings.” (Bhagavad Gita 15.15, 18.61
I have always respected Judaism for refusing to name God.
20 buddhistische Mönche marschieren durch die USA – und Tausende Bürger zeigen sich begeistert. Ihr Friedensmarsch inspiriert und spendet Hoffnung.
Reicht das nicht um zu glauben, an eine stille und doch so aussagestarke Kraft.