naught changeth Thee?

A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:

The problem with being sure that God is on your side is that you can't change your mind, because God sure isn't going to change His. -Roger Ebert, film-critic (1942-2013)

Independent, never related to his word for the day, Anu Garg always gives something to think about at the tail end of his message. The word is usually interesting, but sometimes, as today (pungle), the thought is more intriguing than the word. I probably read this thought in Ebert’s book Life Itself: A Memoir but he had so many cogent things to say that it’s hard to remember. Anu stirs a good one this morning.

Over a course of twenty-five or so years I served as an EfM mentor, a program of Bible and theological education by extension offered for lay people by the school of theology of The University of the South, Sewanee, Tennessee. “Education for Ministry” is not meant to make ordained clergy of folks, it’s designed half and half to give an education similar in part to that read and discussed by seminarians, and through a practice called “theological reflection,” to help folks acquire a habit of looking at their life and the world from a theological perspective. Anu Garg’s thought from Roger Ebert brings this to mind as, looking at the quotation I thought immediately what it suggests about “Roger’s God” even though Roger said it lightheartedly, and perhaps brings into view for examination what I believe about “my” God. Specifically, one can look at a sentence and see what it asserts or alleges about the Deity. Theologically educated, trained and experienced, I enjoy doing this, asking this question, especially in a group such as my Sunday School class: what is the theology of this statement, what does this statement say about God? And, do I agree?

The TR practice is useful to me, because I often find that the statement’s assertion is not one I agree with. I’ll come back to Roger’s statement, but I’m especially thinking about our liturgy, the Collects for each Sunday prescribed in our Book of Common Prayer. The collect for Proper 27 The Sunday closest to November 4, for example, asserts, “O God, whose blessed Son came into the world that he might destroy the works of the devil.” Though the assertion is lifted from 1 John 3:8b and is used by the Church just before Advent when we start thinking about the First and Second Coming, it comes from the seventeenth century, it no longer is matched to the Lectionary reading for which it was composed, it does not fit my view of why Jesus came, and when I am officiating I struggle with saying it because it does not say about the Son what I believe, and I may change it as I say it. Often, with my Sunday School class, I open with the Collect for the Day and then help the class discern it’s theology, what it says about God.

But the theology of Roger Ebert’s statement, which he may not have realized says things about God and raises my question, do I agree? God sure isn't going to change His (mind). Minor point, it implies that God is male, a common reference to God with which I have no particular issue as long as the matter is not pressed. But major, God sure isn’t going to change His mind. I’m deleting the “sure” because it implies certainty about God, with which I almost invariably disagree; thus, “God isn’t going to change his mind.” This reflects my one and perhaps only issue with our closing hymn for Trinity Sunday, the line, “naught changeth Thee” based on our view of a changless God (James 1:17, Hebrews 1:12, et al). However, the proof is not in what we say about God or to God, but in God’s actions, including some 16 or more instances in Scripture, two being my particular favorites. At Genesis 6:6 God changes his mind, regrets that he ever made us in the first place, and proceeds to drown the lot of us. At Exodus 32:14 God changes his mind about his intent to rain down fire and immolate his people Israel after they give up on Moses returning from the mountain and make a golden calf to worship, this being my topmost favorite, “And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.” In that case, God was persuaded to change his mind because Moses shamed Him. So maybe Roger Ebert was wrong, maybe God would change his mind. It’s arguable for any but a mental bull, and could be called “theological discourse.” It can make for noisy discussion in Sunday School class.  

Breakfast. Whisked in a 12-ounce mug, half Bulgarian style buttermilk and half plain kefir. Try it, Sam I Am, you may like it, Sam I Am. 

Outside and down to the street for Linda’s PCNH where as always beyond MLP is Daisy’s green light across the Bay, taking me, simple Jimmy Gatz, where this morning I struggle not to go. ὁ ἀναγινώσκων νοείτω. Yesterday caught in the sprinkler crossfire.

TW+