Personal Note: Tiger’s Tenth Birthday

Today was Tiger’s tenth birthday.  Hard to believe it’s been ten years.  If you want to want to read on how we found him, you can look back where I posted here. Actually you can just click the "Tiger" link on the bottom of the page and pull up all the posts over the years on Tiger.  Matthew was five in those pictures!  Where does time go?  

I’m just going to provide some pictures, all taken in the last few days.  We didn’t do anything special for him, except maybe give him a treat. 

Well here he is looking up at me, probably urging me to give him his food.

 

He just loves to rub up against things.  I think it’s an act of marking his scent on things. 

 

Walking by his litterbox.

 

Here he is curled up on the ottoman into a little fur ball covering his eyes. 

 

And when I poked him, he gave a little squint.  I don’t think he was happy I did that.

 

Another time on the ottoman, just stretching out.

 

The life of a cat. 

 

He’s just so darn cute.

Personal Note: I got Covid, Urgh

Today is Monday the 10th.  So last Wednesday night (the 5^th) it felt a little funny in my chest.  I thought I might be coming down with something.  I woke up Thursday nauseous with dry heaves.  I even teleworked in the morning and took the afternoon sick.  Eventually I was just out of it.  It became hell.  The fever wasn’t high (less than 101F) but I wonder if I was even reading it right.  I was in a delirious state.  Waking up at one point I thought it was the next day. I noticed on Friday morning from my daily pill box that I had already taken Friday's meds.

It felt like my body was encircled by some electric charge and was just trying to survive.  He was ready to have me go to Emergency Room. My screaming out scared Matthew, who had come in the bedroom to check on me. Probably should have sent me to the ER. If it were me watching someone else in that state I would have too. I don’t think my wife ever realized what state I was in.  I had crawled into bed in the middle of the day and time seemed to vanish. 

I felt better on Friday morning but someone suggested I check for Covid. I had my wife pick up a test kit and sure enough I tested positive. I called my doctor and we set up a telehealth visit as they call it. He asked about my temperature (which was oscillating between normal and 101F), looked over my recent blood test on file, asked when I felt it come on, and prescribed Paxlovid.  Doctor said I should quarantine through Tuesday.  I still had recurring chills but after the first dose of Paxlovid that night I started to feel better. There was no fever on Saturday, Sunday, nor today, but a general weakness. 

Today even the nasal congestion seems to have let up.  I feel pretty well.  I happen to speak to a nurse today—about something else actually—and she said that today the flu might be harsher than Covid.  Hmm, I would agree except for what I experienced on Thursday afternoon.  When I spoke to the doctor on Friday, he seemed surprised this was my first time getting Covid.  Is it that common that everyone gets it now?

###

The story has more to it than my experience.  My wife had been sick before me and was still coughing and occasionally feeling run down.  I told her she should check herself for Covid, so she got herself a test kit and also tested positive.  So this was beginning to make sense.  Her mother has been in a nursing home for over a month and a half.  More on that below.  But the floor of my mother-in-law’s room had a Covid outbreak last week, and still does.  My mother-in-law didn’t get Covid but my wife must have picked it up in one of her daily visits.  Nursing homes are just germ magnets, depositories, and dispensaries. 

My wife’s symptoms were nothing as severe as mine, though hers seem to be lasting longer, probably because she has not been prescribed Paxlovid.  This makes me wonder why my body reacted so to the Covid initially.  It reminds me of my first reaction to the Covid-19 vaccine which I detailed here several years ago.  That post was titled, “Knocked on My Butt By the Vaccine.”  Perhaps I’m more reactive to Covid than others.

###

My mother-in-law fell at the beginning of the December.  She fractured her skull, had a brain bleed, they resolved the bleed, but that developed into blood clots, blood clots got into her lungs which nearly killed her, but they resolved that.  You can see I've honed that story down to its bare elements from frequent retelling.  She was three weeks in the ICU.  The day before Christmas Eve she was discharged to a nursing home, and she's been there since.  As you can imagine, this was pretty challenging, especially for my wife, and it still is. 

As it happens, the nursing/rehab facility is very close to our house.  It's less than a mile.  We go back and forth regularly.  The first time she seemed out of it but in time her brain seemed to be getting sharper. Initially she responded very slow and deliberately but now seems to have total comprehension. It took her a while to get up out of bed.  There was nothing physically wrong with her body but perhaps atrophy from being in bed so long.  After a good month of rehab now she has been able to walk up and down the floor with a walker and a cane, go up and down stairs, and fully function as a solitary person.  Today we even got the great news she will be discharged from rehab facility at the end of next week.

###

So let’s end with a song that came to mind as I reflected on my Thursday afternoon delirium.  It’s a song that came off the Rolling Stones’ album that came out last year, “Sweet Sounds of Heaven” of the album Hackney Diamonds.   Many of you know I’m a big Rolling Stones fan, and, while I would agree their later years have been of mixed quality, this album is a glorious return to what I think is just short of their all time great ones.  I highly recommend Hackney Diamonds and perhaps one day I’ll have a post on it.

For now I’m going to highlight “Sweet Sounds of Heaven,” a gospel tune that is uncharacteristically Christian in outlook for the Stones.  Featured on the record are Lady Gaga (vocals), Stevie Wonder (piano and organ), and saxophonist James King.  Wow is not nearly expressive enough.  Here’s the song first, but then I’ll explain why this song came to mind after.

 

Here are most of the lyrics as well.

 

Sweet Sounds of Heaven

(Jagger/Richards)

 

I hear the sweet, sweet sounds of Heaven

Fallin' down, fallin' down to this Earth

I hear the sweet, sweetest sounds of Heaven

Driftin' down, driftin' down to this Earth

 

Bless the father, bless the son

Hear the sound of the drums

As it echoes through the valley

And it bursts, yeah

Let no woman or child

Go hungry tonight

Please protect us from the pain

And the hurt, yeah

 

I smell the sweet scents, sweet

Sweet scents of Heaven, Heaven

Tumblin' down, tumblin' down

Tumblin' down to the Earth (Oh)

I hear the sweet sounds, sweet sounds

The sweet sounds, ooh, the sweet sounds of children

And they're praisin', praisin'

The land of their birth (No)

 

No, I'm not, not goin' to Hell

In some dusty motel

And I'm not, not goin' down

In the dirt (Yes, yes, yes)

I'm gonna laugh, I'm gonna laugh, I'm gonna cry, I'm gonna cry

Eat the bread, drink the wine

'Cause I'm finally, finally quenchin'

My thirst, yeah

 

You can't have a light without a little shadow, yeah

Always need a target for your bow and arrow

I want to be drenched in the rain of your heavenly love

Oh, yeah, c'mon (Oh)

 

Let the music, let the music play loud, play loud

Let it burst, let it burst through the clouds, through the clouds

And we all feel the heat

Of the sun, yeah

Yeah, let us sing, let us shout, let us shout

Let us all stand up proud

Let the old still believe

That they're young, yeah

 

Sweet, sweet sound

 

Sounds so sweet, oh, so sweet

Sounds so sweet, so sweet

Heaven, Heaven

Down

Fallin' down, fallin' down

To this Earth

 

That’s pretty religious for Mick Jagger.  You know he supposedly had converted to Catholicism for his first wife, though he’s never spoken about any religious upbringing, so I doubt it was much.

So why am I reminded of this song?  Well, lying in bed in a delirious state felt so isolating, so other worldly that it felt the end was a possibility.  The verses, “No, I'm not, not goin' to Hell/In some dusty motel/And I'm not, not goin' down/In the dirt” resonate.  If you’ve ever been a way alone (business trips for me) in some crappy hotel, the isolation feels overwhelming with perhaps a sense that if I died here no one would really know.  It’s actually a horrible feeling that I’ve had more than once.  Perhaps in that delirious state, eyes half open in a darkened bedroom, alone and feeling almost out of body, might be as close to a premonition of death as one gets.  At least as I’ve gotten.

But then the sweet grace, the sweet sounds, the sweet sense of heaven came down and revived me.  Thank you Lord.

Edit: It's unclear whether Mick Jagger converted to Catholicism or even had a need to convert.  From what I found on the internet, Mick Jagger's father, Basil Fanshawe “Joe” Jagger, had a Catholic funeral.  There are places that claim Mick was raised Catholic.  Still I doubt religion was a big part of his upbringing.

In Memoriam: Jeanette Lucey

I received some bad news the other day, my friend Jeanette Lucey passed away.  If there are any followers of my blog from the very first years of my blogging here, they may remember I was blogging at two places, this blog as my own blog, and Jeanette’s blog, J’s Café Nette, as part of a team of three, Jeanette, Sue, and me.  Jeanette’s blog was a political blog, and the three of us commented on the politics of the day.  I started this blog as a refuge from the grind of daily politics, which in time I came realize is caustic to one’s soul.  I set up my personal blog to get away from the political wars and dwell on things I enjoyed.  I have been mostly true to that.

The J’s Café Nette blog was definitely commenting from a conservative perspective, and from what I remember—and I could be remembering incorrectly—Jeanette was probably the most balanced of the three of us.  She tried to be fair and give the Democrats and Liberals the benefit of the doubt, while I jumped on the most cynical elements of the left.  I was convinced—and still am—that the left was out to destroy the traditions of this country and Western culture, and I think my posts tended in that vitriolic direction.  As I think back on it, perhaps Jeanette may have been embarrassed by my style.  I wouldn’t be surprised.  Politics could stir a lot of passion out of me, and I wasn’t shy with expressing it.  Jeanette, ever the lady, accepted me while trying to soften my approach.

How we met and how I was invited to blog at Jeanette’s blog is worth telling.  We both frequently commented on The Anchoress blog.  It was a Catholic blog but Anchoress (Elizabeth Scalia) often spoke on the politics of the day, and she rooted her politics to her Christian, and more specially, Catholic principles.  Both Jeanette and I enjoyed that blog and commented frequently.  Now in those days it was common for blogs to keep a roll of sympathetic other blogs on their page, and J’Café Nette was one on Anchoress’s page.  I clicked it and found it to my liking.  I became a frequent commenter there and one day Jeanette sent me an email inviting me to join her and Sue on her blog.  Actually as I was reminiscing through my past emails with Jeanette, I found the very one.  Here is a screenshot of that email.

 

You can see Jeanette’s faith on display with her email footer: “Trust in the Lord…”

Although Jeanette liked The Anchoress, I need to stipulate Jeanette was not Catholic.  She was a Baptist, and she early on reassured me she was not one of those anti-Catholic Protestants.  For one thing she told me a joke about Baptists in heaven. 

 

A man dies and he’s led through the corridors of heaven, and he sees various rooms with doors ajar.  That room is for the Methodists; that room is for the Presbyterians; that room is for the Catholics.  Then they pass a room with the door closed.  Don’t look into that room the guide says, that room is for the Baptists.  But why is the door closed?  They think they’re the only ones in heaven. 

After she told me that joke, I knew we would be good friends.  She also told me about an anti-Catholic who criticized the praying of the Hail Mary.  When she looked into it, she told me, the words are taken right out of the Bible.

She asked about certain Catholic rituals.  I did my best to explain them, though I don’t think I was at the time able to make them clear.  I remember she asked about Catholic funerals.  My memory is a little vague here but I think she said her mother, who was Native-American, returned to her Catholic faith late in life and had a Catholic funeral. 

Of course I accepted Jeanette’s invitation to blog, but now if you look at the date of the Jeanette’s email, it was in March of 2010.  That was a month and a half before my wife and I went to Kazakhstan to adopt our son Matthew.  We were gone for another month and a half.  It was quite an experience and if I remember correctly I gave updates from Kazakhstan on how the process was going.  I think I posted to her blog from abroad, but my memory is vague.  I wish I could get a hold of the old J’s Cafe Nette posts but she dissolved them all into the nether sphere when she closed down the blog.

Over the years, Jeanette would always ask me about my son.  (And I should mention that Sue is also very good about asking on how Matthew is doing.)  Jeanette had a theory on why my son was so friendly with strangers.  As an infant in an orphanage, he was picked up by lots of strangers and just did not develop a fear.  It’s quite a plausible theory.  She asked for pictures of Matthew even after we had stopped blogging. 

I loved going through our past email exchanges.  Here is a paragraph from an exchange back in February of 2016.  The Republican Primary was coming up in her state, and I asked who she was voting for.

 

For the first time in my life I am truly undecided.  Definitely not Trump!  Enough of Bushes and Clintons, not Cruz as he is too stringent and the Canadian thing might bite him in the butt; especially if Trump decides to pursue it.  If he doesn’t you can count on the Dems doing it, but he’s the Republican version of Obama.  His way or no way.  Carson is inexperienced and doesn’t have a chance.  That leaves Rubio and Kasich.  Rubio is a first-term senator and we already have that and look where that got us.  Kasich wants to cut the military but probably civilian jobs that are redundant.  So I don’t know and won’t know until I touch the screen on Saturday.

That was the theme in that primary, “Definitely not Trump!”  I shared that sentiment too, and I don’t have a recollection on who she actually voted for in the primary, but we both voted for Trump in the general.

There was another email about waiting at the hospital while the doctors performed a delicate operation on her husband’s spine.

I could feel the presence of the Lord as I sat there all day Monday waiting to hear it was over.  I got butterflies in my stomach when they told me the operation had started and I said a silent prayer to ask Him to calm me.  It must have happened immediately because I do not recall having butterflies after that.

If there is one single comment that characterizes Jeanette, it’s that one.  She was a woman of faith and family and love.  The operation went well I was told.   

In time both Jeanette and Sue began to grow tired of blogging.  Perhaps it was the dark days of the Obama administration that made us all so cynical.  (She sent me a link to a clock that counted down the days to Obama being out of office!)  So around August of 2013, Jeanette officially closed down her blog.  I posted here about that day, and I urge you to read it.   Jeanette posted a comment, and just like these quotes I posted here it’s wonderful to relive her words and with a little imagination I can hear her voice as I read them.

I will be forever grateful to Jeanette for introducing me to blogging.  I would never have started this blog if not for her and Sue.  They were my mentors.  In honor of Jeanette I will do something that this blog has resisted for these dozen years.  I will break my rule of not going into politics and announce who I will vote for and why in the coming presidential election, and no it is not either of the major candidates.  So stay tune for that.

It is with a tear in my eye I went through these past email exchanges.  She passed away much too young.  You can read her public obituary here.  Oh wow, she had the same birthday as my father.  I never knew.

Eternal rest grant unto Jeanette, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon her.

May her soul and the souls of all the faithful departed rest in peace.  Amen.

 

We never did meet in person Jeanette .  If someday I am led to that room with all the Baptists, I’m going to knock, have you come out, and give you a big hug we never had a chance to give in life.  Take care, my friend.

 

Personal Essay: My Butterfly

I am not a butterfly collector but someone asked me to share this.  In passing I mentioned that a couple of years ago I found a dead butterfly on the stoop of my mother’s house.  I think it was summer, but I don’t exactly remember.  I just looked up the purchase of the display box and it was in the first week of September of 2020.  So I must have found the butterfly within of a week of that.

I found the dead butterfly on the front steps and I was surprised.  It had just plopped there.  My mother does have a pretty garden and I have seen butterflies fluttering about often.  I never saw a dead one before, and one completely undamaged.  I went to pick it up thinking it would fly away, but it didn’t move.  So I picked it up, realized it was dead, and thought it was beautiful.  I can’t imagine it had been a long time since it had died.  My first thought was of the author Vladimir Nabokov.   He was a passionate butterfly collector.  My next thought was, maybe I should try to preserve this like the collectors. 

I delicately put the butterfly on the passenger seat of my car and drove it home.  I figured you needed to refrigerate it, since that is what they do with dead bodies.  I put it in a plastic container and put it in the refrigerator until I read up on how to preserve it. 

You can Google it and find a bunch of sites.  There are variations on the process.  One thing I read that I was certain was that the body needed moisture from drying out.  So I wet a paper towel and put the butterfly inside the wet towel, then back in the plastic container, and then back in the refrigerator. The moisture is supposed to “relax” the butterfly.  I think I kept it in moisture for several days.

So I researched different display boxes and found one that was the perfect size and came with foam filler.  I had planned to follow the directions on pinning the butterfly into place but I realized that the foam actually pressed the butterfly against the glass, and so held it in place without pinning.  Good thing.  I probably would have screwed up the pinning and ruined the body.

Next was that you needed an antiseptic to preserve the body and prevent other insects from munching on it.  Moth balls turned out the easiest solution.  So behind the foam I placed a nice amount of moth balls, centered the butterfly on top of the foam, and closed up the box.  I have never opened it.

 

I think it’s gorgeous.  Comparing the pictures of male and female monarchs, this appears to be a male.  In passing I called this a tiger butterfly but on reflection and checking pictures on the internet, this may be a monarch.  I don’t know the specific differences but the color and line pattern of my butterfly seems to fit the monarch more so.  If anyone can tell the difference, let me know.  Here’s another picture with a ruler to gage the size.

 

It’s almost five inches.  According to the Wikipedia entry, they are supposed to have a wing span of four inches.  So this is a very big one.  

Maybe this is a better picture.  There is some glare off the glass in the above photos.

Personal Essay: To a Superb 2022 Season for the Baltimore Orioles

If you haven’t noticed, my blogging had been reduced the last few months.  It was baseball season!  I just don’t have the free time to do both in a constructive manner.  This year I had resolved to keep up with the blog at all costs but my favorite team made this season so enjoyable that the resolution went down the drain.  For those that may remember, I happen to be a Baltimore Orioles fan.  A very long suffering Baltimore Orioles fan.  Sure they had their glory years from 1966 to 1983 when I was a kid and got hooked on the team, but since then it’s been way more losing seasons than winning.  And the last three of four years they lost over 100 games each year, having the worst record in all of baseball all three of those years.  The only exception was 2020, which was Covid shortened.  But they would have lost 100 games then too.

So it’s been tough.  But this year they became the first team in history to have a winning record after losing over 100 games the previous season.  In fact they nearly made the playoffs, just falling short by three games.  They started that first month just like the previous years, pathetically losing, but after April they started to have winning month after winning month.  They didn’t have any star pitchers.  Their ace (John Means) was actually injured from April on and out for the season.  They really didn’t have any superstar hitters either.  A couple of their young prospects (Adley Rutschman especially) were promoted to the majors and that turned it around.  They won with really good defense and an exceptional bullpen and a lot of hustle.  The starting pitchers would hold the opposition in the early innings; the defense would pull out plays to save the game; the bullpen would shut the opposition down in the late innings; and the team would amazingly pull out quite a number of late inning victories.  What a joy!

You can get a summary of the Orioles' 2022 season here.

They ended the season with a record of 83-79.  But they also played in the toughest division in baseball, the American League East.  Sometimes referred to as the American League Beast.  Three of the five teams made the playoffs.  If the Orioles played in any other division I think they would have made the playoffs.  Was it a disappointment they didn’t?  Sure, but there were too many thrills that in the end it didn’t matter.  There were too many thrills.  What a thoroughly enjoyable season. Last year I complained the development was taking too long. This year they caught up. There was no stepping stone from 100 losses to .500, but so be it. This is where the development plan should be. In fairness, I think Covid did set everything back about a year. In the end, this became one of the most memorable of seasons. To go from a 100+ loss team to above .500 is great. Yes, I know there is always criticism, but nothing is perfect, except in heaven. Overall from the very top to the lowest ball boy, this team needs to be commended. Thank you 2022 Orioles.  Next year we’ll make the playoffs!

###

Some random thoughts on next year and the off season.

As to the off season acquisitions, I'm not sure this team needs that much. We're going to have Gunnar Henderson and Adley for a full year and more mature. Hopefully Ryan Mountcastle shakes the sophomore blues and hits his potential. Jordan Westburg at second base should be a plus. Austin Hays gets better and platoons with Kyle Stowers, who will be more mature. Grayson Rodriguez comes up and John Means returns. Tyler Wells, Kyle Bradish, and Dean Kremer improve. This looks like a very solid team.

I guess you could use a big bat at DH behind Mountcastle. A Trey Mancini type but the Trey of several years ago who hit 35 homers. Otherwise I don't think there is a lot to change.

We could use a backup first baseman.  If Westburg could play first base, that would solve a lot of problems. I wonder why Terrin Vavra hasn't tried backing up first base. That would put it over the top for him.

###

Thinking this over for next year, most teams will field 13 pitchers and 13 fielders. So other than the starting nine hitters, there are four backups.

Here's an assumption for the starting nine: Gunnar (3B), Jorge Mateo (SS), Ramon Urias (2B), Mountcastle (1B), Hays (LF), Cedric Mullins (CF), Stowers (RF), Anthony Santander (DH), Adley ©.

You need a backup catcher, Robinson Charinos or whoever they pick up.

A fifth outfielder, Ryan McKenna.

A back up infielder who can play first base.

A utility player, perhaps Vavra.

Out of the starting nine, I would think Urias may be the weakest argument for starting but he might be a better choice for utility player over Vavra. Maybe. I think the rest of the eight are definite unless they get traded.

McKenna is probably not guaranteed. We have a few outfielders waiting in AAA.

Rougned Odor is probably not picked up, especially if Westburg is ready for the majors. But, and I may be in a very small minority on this, if it comes down to picking two between Vavra, Odor, and Urias, I would pick Odor and Urias.  Remember Odor drove in over 50 RBIs. It's not how high you hit but what you do with the hits you get.  Plus Odor was the heart and soul of the team this year.

I have to say, the bullpen is really solid.  I hope they all come back, but you can never have too much pitching.  Hopefully we can pick up another top relief pitcher.

We'll see where General Manager Michael Elias goes. I can see Elias trading one of our outfielders, but remember no one is going to want your weakest outfielder. If they are going to trade value, they will want value back.

Here are some of the great highlights of a remarkable year.

Now can you blame me for being glued to the Orioles the past few months?

###

It will be an interesting off-season, but I really can’t wait until next seasons starts!

Faith Filled Friday: Does God Change His Mind?

This is a question I have had for the longest time.  Do our prayers change God’s mind over His intended actions?  If God does change His mind based on our importuning, then how do His plans all fit together?  It would seem there would be a lot of random events that get altered because we were persuasive and others weren’t.  We came across this on this first reading of this past Sunday’s lectionary.

The LORD said to Moses,

"Go down at once to your people,

whom you brought out of the land of Egypt,

for they have become depraved.

They have soon turned aside from the way I pointed out to them,

making for themselves a molten calf and worshiping it,

sacrificing to it and crying out,

'This is your God, O Israel,

who brought you out of the land of Egypt!'

"I see how stiff-necked this people is, " continued the LORD to Moses.

Let me alone, then,

that my wrath may blaze up against them to consume them.

Then I will make of you a great nation."

 

But Moses implored the LORD, his God, saying,

"Why, O LORD, should your wrath blaze up against your own people,

whom you brought out of the land of Egypt

with such great power and with so strong a hand?

Remember your servants Abraham, Isaac, and Israel,

and how you swore to them by your own self, saying,

'I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky;

and all this land that I promised,

I will give your descendants as their perpetual heritage.'"

So the LORD relented in the punishment

he had threatened to inflict on his people.

            -Ex:32:7-11, 13-14

So did Moses convince God to alter His plans?  If so, how could God be omniscient?  Wouldn’t He have known Moses was going to come along to present a convincing argument?

I came across this very similar situation in Genesis chapter 18.  Now we know that God ultimately destroys Sodom and Gomorrah, but initially in chapter 18, He is “talked out of it” by Abraham.

20 So the LORD said: The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great, and their sin so grave,

21 that I must go down to see whether or not their actions are as bad as the cry against them that comes to me. I mean to find out.

22 As the men turned and walked on toward Sodom, Abraham remained standing before the LORD.

23 Then Abraham drew near and said: “Will you really sweep away the righteous with the wicked?

24 Suppose there were fifty righteous people in the city; would you really sweep away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people within it?

25 Far be it from you to do such a thing, to kill the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous and the wicked are treated alike! Far be it from you! Should not the judge of all the world do what is just?”

26 The LORD replied: If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.

27 Abraham spoke up again: “See how I am presuming to speak to my Lord, though I am only dust and ashes!

28 What if there are five less than fifty righteous people? Will you destroy the whole city because of those five?” I will not destroy it, he answered, if I find forty-five there.

29 But Abraham persisted, saying, “What if only forty are found there?” He replied: I will refrain from doing it for the sake of the forty.

30 Then he said, “Do not let my Lord be angry if I go on. What if only thirty are found there?” He replied: I will refrain from doing it if I can find thirty there.

31 Abraham went on, “Since I have thus presumed to speak to my Lord, what if there are no more than twenty?” I will not destroy it, he answered, for the sake of the twenty.

32 But he persisted: “Please, do not let my Lord be angry if I speak up this last time. What if ten are found there?” For the sake of the ten, he replied, I will not destroy it.i

33 The LORD departed as soon as he had finished speaking with Abraham, and Abraham returned home.

            -Gen 18:20-33

How does one explain this changing of God’s mind?  I have always explained it in my mind that God’s mind wasn’t changed but that He was letting His interlocutor present His case so that God could do what He truly intended all along.  God knew the interlocutor was going to appeal, and for some reason He wanted him to do so.  Why?  Because God wanted the interlocutor to pray, and prayer is pleasing to God and beneficial for the soul of the one praying.  That’s how I explained it to myself.

Fr. Samuel Keyes takes this very subject up in a homily he published in Catholic Answers magazine, “Did Moses Change God’s Mind?”  Now Fr. Keyes’s homily addresses and integrates the second reading (1 Tm 1:12-17) and the Gospel reading (Lk 15:1-32) of the 24^th Sunday of Year C.  I gave an explanation of the Gospel reading on the most recent “Sunday Meditation.”  I’m going to hold the focus of this post strictly to what Fr. Keyes says about the first reading on God changing His mind.  You can read the excellent homily on your own. 

Now it seems that my understanding of this theological issue is not wrong, but not complete.  First, Fr. Keyes points out that we have to understand God in a Judeo-Christian sense, and not a Greek pagan sense.

 

If we have a primitive understanding of deity and think of God like the ancient Greeks thought of Zeus or the Canaanites thought about their Baals, there’s no problem, because gods are gods due to their immortality or their power, not due to their intrinsic metaphysical distinction from creation. Yet the Jewish scriptures give us a rather different picture of divinity. And so, the statement in Exodus 32 has to be paired with a statement like that of Numbers 23:19, where “God is not a man that he should repent.” On the surface, both verses cannot be true. Either we must interpret the one in the light of the other, or we must declare one to be incorrect—something that as loyal disciples we cannot do.

What makes the Judeo-Christian God different from the Greco pagan gods is that the Greco gods are superhuman versions of man and not transcendent.  They are of this world.  The Jewish God is not anthropomorphic and therefore does not have emotions or compunctions and therefore the need to repent.  Fr. Keyes continues:

 

The second statement, on God’s non-repentance, reflects a growing understanding of God’s nature that we see unfolding not just in ancient Israel but among pagan philosophers like Socrates and Plato. For divinity to mean anything, the divine nature must be something transcendent. Otherwise, he is simply the biggest piece of creation. But Genesis shows God not just as the first thing but as the source of everything that exists, which means that his own existence is categorically different from the existence of all created things. More and more, as time goes on, the prophetic and wisdom literature of the Old Testament reflect this understanding.

So God is both transcendent and not anthropomorphic.  So far Fr. Keyes has put theological language around the same thought I had.  Then he gets to the part I had not realized.

 

God’s self-revelation, in other words, happens in stages. As Moses learns in Exodus, a full view of his glory would destroy us. We can only see him from the back, from a distance, in passing. But, as Paul speaks about it in the New Testament, the law was a kind of tutor, training humanity towards a greater capacity not just for virtue but for vision. It is only in Christ, and in the New Testament revelation of the Trinity, that we see revelation in its fullness.

God’s full revelation happens in stages!  Man in the early parts of the Old Testament has not come to theological maturity to understand the fullness of His being, and so God speaks in a manner in which we can understand.  He appears to change His mind to reach down to our level of understanding.  Fr. Keyes then sums up.

 

What does all this mean for God’s “repentance” in Exodus 32? Presumably Moses and the people of Israel do not yet have this full metaphysical understanding of the divine nature. So, the tradition suggests, God allows himself to be known in an adapted anthropomorphic way. God doesn’t change. But God’s will does take into account human will and response.

 

This gets at the heart of the mystery of prayer. God doesn’t change. But part of God’s unchanging will is that his creatures participate and cooperate in his work. He does not change, but we do. And surely part of how we change is just in this learning more and more about the God who reveals himself to us.

So God doesn’t change, but He wants you to keep praying because prayer and relationship with Him is grace.  Just like a father assembling a bicycle with his son wants the son to feel he helped or a mother baking a cake with a daughter wants the daughter to feel she helped, so God wants us to cooperate with Him.  Neither Moses nor Abraham changed God’s mind. This also explains why the nature of God in the Old Testament appears different than that of the New Testament.  

So should you pray to change God’s mind?  Yes, not only does He factor those prayers ahead of time, but He will love the relationship you build with Him.

Praise God.