"In whose name we pray"

The Sacramento Bee encourages the Lodi city council to make sure its invocations are inclusive. (link)

I've never been to a Lodi council meeting, but I've been to enough public and private meeting where the person leading the prayer gives the standard "Dear Lord, thank you for letting us gather; guide our judgement; etc." invocation. It contains sentiments universal enough to be acceptable to most people of faith, if not embraced specifically. But right there at the end, just when you think that the prayer leader understands that he is performing a service for everyone in the group, not just for his or her particular sect or even for the majority, the prayer will end with "In Jesus' name we pray."

Now, I agree with The Bee. To be acceptable at a governmental function, the prayer at least needs to be as inclusive as possible. Why not end prayers with "In Your name we pray?" The point is that when the leader says "In Jesus' name we pray" the operative word is we. He is leading a prayer on behalf of all, and he should not at the end seek to nullify the prayers of some in the assembly, yanking the rug out from under them, slamming the door in their face and reminding them that if you're not praying in Jesus' name, it doesn't count. But that is the effect it has on non-Christians.

This comes up as well at private events. I belong to both the Kiwanis and to Scouting, both of which open meetings with prayers. No constitutional provision guides these organizations (except of course, the freedom to practice unrestricted by government). I've only been a Kiwanis member a short time, but I find that there is an attempt to be inclusive and respect everyone's backgrounds. Perhaps this is because my club is in a very diverse community. More homogenous communities may have more Jesus-centered language. But I find Scouting members frequently forget about their religious diversity. My Cub Scout pack has members from other non-Christian faiths, and I sometime cringe that they are thought of as being lesser in the eyes of the Christian majority. When a camp leader was asking for volunteers to say grace before a meal, a Jewish dad in our unit joked, asking whether he should step up and lead the prayer in Hebrew. Even more, what if I volunteered to open a meeting with the Heart Sutra.

It is so easy to get bogged down in the procedural rules -- as the previous paragraph did. But I think there is a deeper issue at play here. As a Christian, I can see in others a tendency to focus so much on Jesus that we become incapable of praying to the Creator. When the disciples asked Jesus how to pray, he taught us to use an inclusive prayer that thanks Him for his blessings and asks Him for guidance and wisdom: The Our Father. This model can be embraced by almost all people of faith, and may even be embraced by those, like Buddhists whose concept of God is more universal and less personal.

The Bee's editorial says that a group will be holding a "Stand Up for Jesus" rally on August 5. I think this group is off-track. We Christians sometimes think that because Jesus sacrificed for us that we must return the favor and sacrifice for Him. But that wasn't the point. He died for us, first to redeem us. And secondly, the model of love and sacrifice he set is for us to sacrifice for our fellow man. If we were to trample on the dignity of our fellow man in order to defend Jesus, we do Christ a disservice. We are like the Apostle who raised his sword to defend Jesus when he was arrested. We don't need to defend Jesus. We need to follow his example.

Be inclusive, be respectful and find a way to bring people closer to God with charity and understanding. If we are using prayer to divide people instead of bringing them closer to God, we are not praying in Jesus' name.