Paul Tillich talked about the limitations of language and the transcendence of the holy when he wrote about "the God above the God of theism." That is to say, whatever God is, God is more than our best description of God. For centuries we have argued some (a lot?!) about which image is better, what symbol set makes most sense rather than seeing what we can learn from images and symbol sets that don't necessarily make sense to us.
In his Spiritual Exercises, Ignatius Loyola encouraged his young Jesuit novices to begin their search for spiritual truth to begin with this exercise. Prompted by one's spiritual director, the novice was instructed to complete as many "God is..." statements as could be corroborated by "scripture or experience." The novice would then create the "God is..." list --
God is love.
God is peace.
God is justice.
God is light.
God is ruler.
God is truth.--
God is... --
and then proceed to the mentor for direction. The spiritual director would listen warmly, intently, patiently as the novice would read one by one the "God is..." list and explain each individual statement. The mentor would press the novice through each rationale to the place where the novice would say "God is not only love, or peace, or light," or whatever.
"What then, my son, is God?" Almost invariable the novice would revisit his list, and his "not only list" and then move to a place of great exasperation and blurt out "God is...God!"
"Precisely," the mentor would reply. "God is God."
1 comment:
Sometimes words are a trap. Can you exactly describe the totality of the experience of a beautiful sunset? Or a newborn child? Even when we think we have a clear understanding of a specific word, another considers a shade of that meaning.
Like the Zen saying about the one guiding the other's glance towards the moon with their finger. Do not mistake the moon for the finger.
So how can we describe the indescribable? Personally, I think it is a pointless exercise. God is God!
Stephen
Post a Comment