Blog

The need for non-monarchial language for God

Have you ever noticed how often the word “Lord” is used in Church. We Christians use it heavily for naming God. The problem is, that it is, as a word, quite anachronistic to modern parlance. For many Lord and King, creates a sense of an outdated approach to governance, a hierarchical approach to social organisation. In our brave new post-secular culture, we need to be careful not to be lazy about our language for God, and the importance to seek out constantly changing language as a metaphor for God.

I have just met up for a coffee with Padraig, who talked about an indigenous South African word for God as the ‘Big Big’. I like that as a metaphor, as it is saying that God is bigger than the biggest thing you can imagine, so the God that is outside of our imagination… so encourages the sense of transcendence without imposing majestic androcentric understandings onto God the Creator. He also named another metaphor used by a friend of his for God, as ‘The Bigest’ I like that too.

On Sunday, Jemma Allen, our friendly New Zealand Priest continues her unpacking of a theology of friendship, to talk about the Kin-dom rather than the Kingdom, which again reconstructions an understanding of friendship as the locus of God’s purposes to draw all things back into restored relationships with the divine.

POSTED 10.10.09 BY: admin | Comments (2)

2 Responses to “The need for non-monarchial language for God”

  1. On October 9th, 2009 at 6:01 pm highpastor said:

    Does this mean that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYAXGvev4dM&feature=related is a good insight into the nature of God. (At least if they never sang "he's")If so I am struggling.

  2. On October 10th, 2009 at 9:43 am PeterR said:

    Ian, I like lots of what you say here. Arabic has a useful version of superlative, intensive, which is used for God, which is roughly the same as "incomparably" – not "biggest" because that implies that God is somehow comparable, whereas God is beyond that comparison – and yet allows us to attribute qualities to God which operate within our language."Big" is fine for many purposes. However, "Lord" – which of course had other resonances in other times – does capture one thought which we do well not to lose. That is the sense that God is to be obeyed, in that God's will is to be followed when it cuts across our own will. That sense of obedience may not be convenient or fashionable (it's certainly counter-cultural and departs from the consumer model of faith-flitting), but it seems to be at the core of a deeper prayer life. I'm not sure that "Big" captures that aspect.