God-Talk: By What Name Do We Call God?

Abstract

Russell McCutcheon, in his article Naming the Unnameable, (MTSR 111 [1990], 213-229), raises the question of names for the deity in the milieu of Religious Studies. He uses an article of mine, Language About God, in Studies in Religion1 as a foil to question whether one can advocate the use of inclusive language for the deity, and in particular, whether one who uses and advocates the use of inclusive language for the name of the unnameable does harm to the integrity of other religions. McCutcheon is correct in his observation that I was writing from within a particular religious framework. The God of whom I spoke is the God of the Israelites and the Christians. Tire consideration of names for the deity in the Religious Studies context was not on my mind. Yet his queries have led me to some thoughts about the matter from a linguistic, as well as from a theological point of view In responding to his questions, my task will be fourfold: first, to explore briefly the feminist agenda related to inclusive language; second, I hope to illustrate some of the problems and possibilities attendant with gender-neutral god-language by using the Christian religion as an example; a third section joins the debate about whether the theological is the political; and my final point very quickly reviews the sociolinguistic premise concerning the interrelationship among language, thought and culture. Although the material here may seem unusual in a theological or religious studies discussion, I find it essential for demonstrating why the issue of gender-neutral god-language is crucial in all contexts including that of religious studies.