Pray in the Spirit (Not the Name) of Jesus

A Wiccan spell granting BO good fortune would just as effective as any prayer to god or the simple preacher man aka Jesus!!!

i thank VAtican for this inheritance shall be available and public, and these shall be Gifts to All and to Children, at least to Students and Lecturers.

thanks for this Compassionate Mindful Help for us to be Together. i had asked for a channel on cable TV two years ago and now on internet.

Ahiret HAyati ile Sonsuz HAyatin, ileri duzey islam ile evrensel tutusturucu "ignatius" tatbikatinin, ifade irade bilinc ve uygulamada birbirlerini destekler olduklarini hatta ahiret hayatinin hakikate donmesi icin tutusturucu tatbikata ihtiyac duyar halde oldugunu gordum, ve buyuk keyif aldim.

i thank to Representative of Holiness Pope Benedictus for the Blessings, Addresses, Speeches and Verbalizations are on Youtube. after www.catholic.org, this channel is the Grandest Connection.

and to Representative of Majesty Queen Elizabeth for this Opportunity on Internet. i visit every Christmass Time for the New Year Blessings and Address.

REPLY TO jweider007:

Omigod! There is at least one person other than myself who actually reads the Bible and what Jesus actually said before rendering their opinions in online blogs about what Jesus said. In particular, there is at least one other person on God's green earth who knows that Jesus explicitly condemned praying in public. Jesus, in fact, stated explicitly that the biggest hypocrites on earth are those who make a big deal out of praying in public. Jesus' formula is clear: Public prayer=hypocrisy.

How absolutely revealing about the condition of Christianity--and especially, its evangelical/right wing component--that this debate on Rick Warren's inaugural prayer is taking place in a total vacuum from the actual words of Jesus. Not Rev. Reese; not Rev. Warren; not Rev. Graham; not Jimmy Dobson; not Barack Obama--have word one to say about Jesus' words regarding public prayer. In fact, in all the words written throughout On Faith by a host of contributors and commentators, only two people--myself and jweider007--have bothered to quote Jesus on the topic at hand.

But, oh my. Don't most of those Christian contributors and commentators allege firm knowledge and absolute certitude about what Jesus' opinion is on abortion and gay rights--two subjects on which Jesus had absolutely nothing explicit to say?

I can only posit this: How long does any Christian with an ounce of brains expect this level of hypocrisy and blind ignorance to continue without doing grievous damage to your religion? Beneath the glitter of those mega-churche extravaganzas, evangelical denominations are bleeding membership. Just Google the latest figures for the Southern Baptists. Of course, that just means that the rest of us just don't get it, right? Uh-oh. Isn't there something in the Bible about the mote in one's own eye? But wait! That requires someone to actually read the words of Jesus before making a judgment. And we're right back at square one, aren't we?

" rosechatwick

"Well, I guess I would just have to be bold and PRAY IN THE NAME OF JESUS! I don't have to clarify anything to anyone but Our Lord and Savior. And I will do that through Jesus because that is what the Bible instructs. If you want a pray to allah, sheba or the sun god...then don't call on Jesus. See where it gets you."

In Newsweek trying to catch the conscience of self-appointed vicarious Kings in defense of the Republic?

Twill do.

Well, I guess I would just have to be bold and PRAY IN THE NAME OF JESUS! I don't have to clarify anything to anyone but Our Lord and Savior. And I will do that through Jesus because that is what the Bible instructs. If you want a pray to allah, sheba or the sun god...then don't call on Jesus. See where it gets you.

Jimmy Carter didn't attend the Interfaith Service in 1977. Instead he attended a private service at First Baptist according to a contemporary NYT article.

"Four years later, Pastor Caldwell softened it a bit but still kept Jesus: "respective of all faiths, I submit this prayer in the Name of Jesus.""

That's a nice one, right there. (I suppose depending what he meant by 'respective') He's saying who he comes in the name of, but speaking for all, not claiming his way is 'above all others.' )

I think it's good for Christians, too, in a pluralistic nation. It expresses an intent by that Christian to be a friend to the rest of us, not an adversary, or a gatekeeper between us and our civil rights and dignity.

So many Christians in politics like to cast the rest of us as 'enemies' and 'rival secular religion'

There was this ska song on the radio I was singing along with this morning, 'Why can't we be friends,'

I don't think of your Jesus as an enemy, as little as I may think of many of his followers, and as much as I protest what's done in that name.

Maybe all Christians care about is if someone says ' Jesus,' or 'lord' or whatnot.

Tend to see things in terms of all or nothing, in that regard.

Maybe ...coming to the rest of the nation as friends is different from declaring culture war and claiming any non-mention of your self-proclaimed vicarious lordship over all.

Can we be friends?

"In fact, the First Congress in 1789 required judges and executive officers to include "So help me God" in their oaths"

This is incorrect. The Judiciary Act of 1789 is online, and the first oath/affirmation is for clerks:
http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/judiciary_1789.htm
...
take the following oath or affirmation, to wit: "I, A. B., being appointed clerk of , do solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will truly and faithfully enter and record all the orders, decrees, judgments and proceedings of the said court, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties of my said office, according to the best of my abilities and understanding. So help me God." Which words, so help me God, shall be omitted in all cases where an affirmation is admitted instead of an oath.

Thanks, Fr Reese, for your comments on praying in the Spirit of Christ, not necessarily in the Name of Christ. As a military Chaplain, and later, as a police Chaplain for the Prince Georges County (MD) force, I often made "public", or ceremonial, prayers, as distinct from those in the context of worship in Chapel. As such, I have always tried to remember my "congregation" and the occasion. I can pray to remember police officers who have died in the line of duty, recognizing they are of different races and religions. In such a case, I try to pray something that everyone there can assent to. As part of my preparation over the years, I have looked at some of the most ancient and beloved prayers of the Christian faith, and discovered that not all of them end in the Name of Jesus. As an example, one familiar prayer, the "Prayer of (attributed to) St Francis": "Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace..." It is profoundly Christian in its faith, and yet does not explicitly contain the name of Christ. That, to me, is a model for prayer.

We have a major problem in the US military at present, as there is a movement started by fundamentalist Christians, who demand that people in uniform have the right to "witness" to their faith, and Chaplains have the "right" to pray explicitly in the Name of Christ, even at secular occasions: watch turnovers, change of command, etc. When senior officers/enlisteds demand the right to witness to young troops, there is a direct element of coersion. Young troops are being forced to participate in "prayers" that violate their own religious beliefs. The rights of the Chaplains are being used to trample the needs of the troops. This does NOT enhance solidarity and unit cohesion, and yet, it is spreading throughout the military. This "evangelical Christian" movement has been supported by the outgoing administration.

We live in a very religiously diverse society. When we pray in official capacities, we need to find ways to include all the people present. That is the strength of our country, that all people can participate without violating conscience. As a Christian minister, my goal is charity in my prayer, not confrontation.

Thanks again, Fr Reese!

Pr Chris

It reflects well on you that you try to be as inclusive as possible in public prayers.

I don't object to public prayer by any member of any religion. The important thing is that such prayers are not mandated. It does me no harm to participate in public expression of religious faith out of respect for the beliefs of others.

The problem is that many religious get the laws of their God mixed up with some concept of universal morality or natural law and fail to respect the beliefs and cultural practices of others. Catholics are especially prone to do this. They see nothing wrong with Catholicism being proclaimed the State religion and having the populace forced to support its institutions, live by its canon law and study its dogma in school.

Oh, the complete irony of the title and entire theme of your column. If you were actually praying in the "spirit" of Jesus, you would be doing it in private as Jesus instructed you to instead of in public.
You write "But in a public prayer outside a Christian institution, I think Christian ministers can and should pray to God without bringing in Jesus. This does not deny Jesus. It simply invites everyone in our pluralistic society to join our prayer to the fullest extent that they can. Would Jesus mind? I don't think so."
Of course if you ever actually read the bible you find that Jesus himself spoke clearly against public pray in Matthew 6:5-6 when he said " And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."
Furthermore, in Matthew 22:21 Jesus was clearly preaching in favor of a separation of church and state when he said "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”.
For most people who support public prayer as a claim to freedom of religion, it is a bogus argument since public prayer is a clear violation of their religion. The call for public prayer is nothing more than political posturing.
On this issue, I think it would be wise for Christians to ask "What would Jesus do?".
But then, since when do Christians care what Jesus had to say about anything?