blog 10

In writing my paper about prayer and analyzing the beliefs revealed in the different prayers we pray, I have been contemplating a number of themes, particularly those addressed in our readings. The reading by Nicholas Lash intrigued me through its discussion of the manner in which we address God as our Father, and the limitedness of our ability to express our relationship with God and understand it--when we think of a father, a very human, personal experience is brought to mind, and it is problematic because we each have very different and dynamic relationships with our earthly fathers, whether good or bad. This would mean somehow that we each envision God to be somewhat different, but it is wrong to envision him as a Father in the human sense anyway, because in doing so we assume God is a creature. Additionally, as Lash explains, our tendency to interpret father in a literal, human sense, forces us to exlude the maternal in God. It is important to think about our meaning when we call on God, our Father, and what we truly believe God to be (although, no matter what we believe God is, that does not change or alter what God actually is).
I then consider Augustine's confessions, and am deeply moved by some of the seemingly simple truths with which he struggles. The overall theme seems to be, God, you are my creator--who else could have produced anything at all, let alone anything good? God, you are the only one who can forgive my debts and the debts of others. I do not need to understand you to worship or rejoice in you, and to try to understand you fully would discredit my faith. I should rather, "delight in finding you who are beyond discovery rather than fail to find you by supposing you to be discoverable." (8) Augustine concludes the section by confessing, "I will be with you since it was your gift to me that I exist." These passages bring much peace to me, because they remind me that God's existence as my creator is the truth, and I cannot fight that and do not want to, because to do so would mean to have to work endlessly to find other meaning in my life, to no avail. I am able to then think less about understanding God and more about being free in my faith and letting go of my own control.
Wadell's article on forgiveness and redemption has challenged and inspired me, of course drawing my attention to what I mean personally when I ask God, in the Lord's prayer and my own prayers, to forgive me, and if I do so with the right intentions and the right expectations. I agree that it is inappropriate to think of forgiveness as a free pass to get out of the consequences of sin--on the contrary, it can only happen alongside the earthly consequences of sin, the dealing with of which lead to redemption. The consequences of sin are inescapable, but the willingness to live forgiven makes them bearable--without this willingness, one could argue that the sinner has not truly repented of his or her sin.
Finally, I am brought to consider the meaning of a kingdom turned upside down without getting stuck on the semantics of when, where, and what this kingdom actually is and represents. Kraybill has made me consider even further what it means to ask God for God's kingdom to come and what I believe God's kingdom is, from a Christian perspective or worldview.
Each of these readings, as I prepare my paper, forces me to really challenge the substance of my beliefs as reflected through prayer. In particular, in the analysis of John Baillie's prayer, I must step aside from my feelings that it is a sincere and poetic prayer, prayed with the best of intention and beliefs, and really examine what the prayer says about the way that Baillie believes in and perceives God, and whether that is an accurate perception based on the fundamental Christian beliefs portrayed through the Lord's prayer.