Time now past for invoking Jesus in official state prayer

It’s OK to drop the name of Jesus from the parliamentary prayer, writes Graham Redding. 

In an opinion piece earlier this month, Richard Dawson (Faith and Reason, 1.12.17) argued that the name of Jesus should not be dropped from the parliamentary prayer. His argument seemed to rest on the positive influence  Christianity has had on Western civilisation, including the fostering of religious tolerance and freedom. To pray in the name of Jesus Christ is to affirm the tolerance and freedom that Jesus embodied and enabled in his person and work.

Following this line of logic, far from reflecting a position of exclusivity or privilege for Christianity, praying in the name of Jesus is a radically inclusive act.

I’m not convinced.

For the earliest Christians, the act of praying in Jesus’ name was a mark of their religious identity and an expression of their belief that Jesus was a unique mediating figure between God and humanity.

If we’re honest we will admit that we do not know how to pray as we ought, but when we pray in the name of Jesus there is a sense in which we submit our faltering prayers, born of an imperfect faith, to the One  the New Testament declares to be the pioneer and perfector of our faith, the One who graciously binds our prayers to his own, conforming them to his will, completing them and presenting them to God in our place and on our behalf. 

That’s how it’s always been for followers of Jesus, past and present.

There is an implied commitment here to actively seek the will of the One in whose name we pray, to look at the world through his eyes, to follow his example, and even to pray in the manner that he taught his disciples.

Hence the importance of the Lord’s Prayer, which stands at the centre of the Christian prayer life.

Prayer, thus understood, is a disciplined, humbling activity. It is less about words than it is about disposition.

It is less about asking for God’s blessing on our many noble endeavours and esteemed institutions (including State and Church) than it is about humbly seeking the will of Christ.

All of this, of course, presumes a certain perspective (and faith in Christ) to which the general populace, comprising as it does people of many different religious faiths and none, is unlikely to subscribe.

It is therefore not appropriate to expect a parliament that represents the full breadth of that populace to conduct its affairs and to pray in Jesus’ name.

To do so is nothing more than a legacy of Christendom, an expression of civil religion, a product of a bygone era. Time to move on and to let the Church rediscover the joy of praying in Jesus’ name without imposing that expectation on the State. 

- The Very Rev Dr Graham Redding is Master of Knox College, Dunedin, and a former Moderator of the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand. 

Comments

We live in a time where liberal secularists want to eradicate the Christian faith and this seems like a small step in their mission. Around the world "offensive" terminology such as Easter, Christmas, AD, BC etc are slowly being banned. People want a new secularist national anthem, want to stop state funding of Christian schools, remove charitable donation rebates for churches etc. These are issues being openly talked about.

Parliament is a House of Representatives. It would be amazing if a Supernatural deity intervened, but Reason dictates this will not happen. In any case the entity would think He's in the Press Gallery.