Skip to main content

let us pray


This past weekend we took in the annual Nuit Blanche which Montreal puts on: festivities and cultural events all the night long and free breakfast at 5 am if you stay up the whole night. We made it till 2 am, taking in the fireworks, winter bar (a tent erected outside with tables, chairs, beer, loud music, lights, and hockey on big tv screens), the ice slide (see picture above), and numerous shows and museums which were all free that night. Other than getting really cold because I was way under-dressed for the walk outdoors, it was a fun time. Who else would stage an all-nighter on the town in the middle of winter than those crazy Montreal folks? I love this city!

I read an interesting article on prayer today while I was at the hairdresser (an interesting setting to be doing Theology homework). The writer presented two different views of prayer and ultimately, of God. The first was that a perfect being with a perfect purpose and perfect power to accomplish that purpose cannot be influenced in any way by our pitiful requests. He has already set all things in motion, and the best we can do is go along with it, because nothing we do or say changes anything and if we think it does, we are deluded. The second viewpoint was of a God who is changing, who is learning and growing and moving toward his purpose together with us. He loves to be surprised by our actions (because he does not know exactly what we will choose to do next), and incorporates our prayers into shaping his good purpose for this world. The writer sided with the second point of view.

It made for some interesting reading, and though I think he paints two extremes which both carry a seed of truth, my main problem with his writing was that he started from a very human point of view. He assumed that change is good and not changing is bad. But if you are perfect and whole, what is the purpose of change? He seemed to be concocting a god that he could understand and appreciate, a better version of himself, and that is not God at all. Last Sunday, my good friend mentioned that too often we are praying to a god of our own making, a god based more on our biases and desires than on His revelation of himself. And this is basically breaking the first directive he gave which was not to make any idols.

We, as humans, have a very hard time imagining something other than ourselves. We describe God like some grand creature that we can see the underbelly of and with that small snapshot, we assume that we have a fairly good comprehension of the whole being. But we forget that we are only seeing a part, and from a decidedly limited vantage point. God is not like us. He does not change; what he does is reveal. He reveals bits of himself and his ways and his truth and his love and his purpose and his character and his work, and if I grasp any of it at all, I will be the one undergoing change.

"Prayer changes things" has always been a bothersome phrase for me. Prayer in and of itself has no power to change anything. It is not some magic ritual whereby I get what I want. To think that I can bend God's will to mine is a dangerous position to put myself in, indeed. But I can make a request, I can ask for those things that I know he loves, and I can submit my will to his. In some mysterious way, something always changes when I make this choice, and most often it starts in me.

Comments

Shelley said…
I totally agree with you about the comment 'prayer changes things' !! It does make it sound like something magic. That has bugged me for years. It's true, we need to ask and pray and we don't ask or pray enough. But it's God who changes things! The important thing is who we are praying to, not the praying!

i'm done now. :)
Matte Downey said…
Yes, thanks Shelley. It is very important WHO we pray to and even then, our prayers are not the carriers of power, God is. Approaching the most powerful being in the universe and being able to have a conversation with him is a most amazing privilege.

Popular posts from this blog

what binds us together?

For the past few weeks, I have been reading a book by famed psychiatrist M. Scott Peck which chronicles his travels (together with his wife) through remote parts of the UK in search of prehistoric stones. The book is part travel journal, part spiritual musings, part psychology, and part personal anecdotes. A mixed bag, to be sure, and not always a winning combination. At one point, I considered putting the book aside, not finishing it, but then Peck started writing about community. He is no stranger to the concept. He has led hundreds of community-building workshops over the years, helped start a non-profit organisation dedicated to fostering community, and written a compelling book about the topic, one which greatly impacted me when I read it oh so long ago.[1]

In preparation for a course I am teaching next year, I have been doing quite a bit of study on unity and community. Once you start thinking about it, you see and hear evidence of it everywhere. (See my blog on the impact of b…

job hunting

I am on the hunt for a job. PhD in hand, I am a theologian for hire. The thing is, not a lot of places are hiring theologians these days, and if they are, they are usually looking for scholars with skills and experience outside my area of expertise. Today I found job opportunities for those knowledgeable in Religion, Race, and Colonialism, Philosophy and History of Religion, Islam and Society, Languages of Late Antiquity, Religion, Ethics, and Politics, and an ad for a Molecular Genetic Pathologist. Not one posting for a Dramatic Theologian with  a side order of Spirituality and a dash of Methodology.

I know, I know. My expectations are a bit unrealistic if I believe I will find an exact match for my particular skills. I know that job descriptions are wish lists to some extent, so no candidate is ever a perfect match. I also realize that one must adapt one's skill set according to the requirements of the job and be flexible. But there are so few jobs which come within ten or even…

lessons from a theological memoir and a television series about lawyers

It's a hot Wednesday afternoon, so let's talk about false binaries. Basically, a false binary or false dichotomy happens when a person's options are artificially limited to two choices, thereby excluding all other possibilities. Insisting on the limited choice of either A or B leaves no room for middle ground or another, more creative solution. In other words, a false binary assumes the rest of the alphabet (after A and B) does not exist.

Binary thinking is quite prevalent in our society. Either you are for me or against me. Either you are guilty or innocent. Either you are a Democrat or a Republican, conservative or liberal. Either you are a Christian or a pagan. Either you are all in or all out. Admittedly, it is convenient to see things as either black or white, but we live in a multi-coloured world and not everything fits neatly into two categories. This is why insisting there are only two choices when, in fact, other options exist, is labeled as a fallacy in logic an…