What is in a Name?

William Shakespeare famously put these words into the mouth of his tragic heroine, Juliet:

“What’s in a name?  That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet: So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call’d, Retain that dear perfection which he owes Without that title.  Romeo, doff thy name, And for that name which is no part of thee Take all myself.”

Would Romeo’s nature be any different if he were called by another name - “for that name which is no part of thee”? 

No, of course Romeo’s nature would not be transformed simply by the act of renaming him, Juliet does have a point. 

This truth is always trotted out when some Kiwi starts “hand wringing” about yet another name change.  “Aoteoroa” or “New Zealand”?  Does it really make that much of a difference?  

Those of us who object to or question the renaming and tortuous double-naming of anything and everything that has become such a prominent feature of our national life are mocked and caricatured for daring to question this modern orthodoxy.  Any detractors of this relentless renaming and double-naming are dismissed as precious, unsophisticated, backwards, far-right, narrow-minded, racist.   People who oppose this craze for re-naming everything from government departments, to schools, to corporations, to charitable trusts, to streets, mountains, rivers, cities, activities (we no longer have meetings, we have huis) and even ourselves are told to “get a life”, “move with the times” and that we have got “more import things to worry about”.  

What is the big deal? 

Well, of course, the dilemma upon which the drama of Romeo and Juliet hinges is that their names, Capulet and Montague, really did matter.  Their story is shaped by what their names signify about their world and their places in that world. 

What importance is attributed to names in the bible?  What significance does the act of naming have in the Kingdom of God? 

Matthew 1:20-21             

“But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.  She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

God sent an Angel who named Jesus in declaring the messianic incarnation.  It was not Joseph’s job to name Jesus because God was the father of Jesus, not Joseph.  Notice that as God claims the naming rights of Jesus he is also speaking of the purpose of Jesus.  Notice also that God addresses Joseph by name.  God speaks to Joseph as an individual.  God uses our names.  God deals with us as individuals and this is signified by his use of our individual names. 

Matthew 22: 31-32 

(Jesus speaking) “…have you not read what God said to you, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’.”

God is the God of individuals.  God is not the “The Sun God”, nor is God the “God of Wind”.  The true God is not the “God of War” or the “God of Fertility” or “the Forest” or some mountain or river.  God is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.  He is the God of the living. 

Consider the many genealogies in the bible, much of holy scripture is given over to long lists of names.  The people of God are not presented as some cultural collective, sublimated beneath Whanaungatanga, lost in a group identity.  God’s people exist in God’s Kingdom as named individuals.  That is how they relate to each other and that is how they relate to God. 

Genesis 2: 19 

"Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky.  He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name."

The fact that “man” was given the task by God of naming the other creatures placed human kind above the other creatures, it was God setting humanity apart and giving us dominion over his creation.  And also note that animals got named as species but people got named as individuals.  Naming rights speak of status and relationship.  Naming rights speak of hegemony, of dominion.  A parent gets to name a child because of a special relationship.  A sponsor gets naming rights over a building or event because of a special commercial relationship.  The winemaker gets to name their wine because they made it.  Those who rightfully exercise naming rights do so out of special relationship and are exercising an earned privilege or dominion over the thing being named. 

Genesis 17: 3-5 

"As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations.  No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham, for I have made you a father of many nations. "

In the bible, re-naming also speaks of new purpose and covenant (a kind of contract or constitution).  The power to re-name is associated with the power to re-purpose and to redefine the terms of a relationship  (“covenant” or  “constitution”).  Another example of this is when the armed forces commandeer and re-fit a ship, that ship will be renamed because it now comes under the command of the navy and has a military purpose, not a civilian one. 

• What are your thoughts on the naming rights being grasped and extended in our country on a seemingly daily basis?  
• What purpose, if any , do you think is behind all this re-naming activity?  
• Who do you think has the right to name what?