Skip to main content

In Jesus' name, pt. 1 - Prayer and Jesus' name

There is quite the little controversy bubbling up in Tulsa. In Saturday's Tulsa World there was an article about the prayer that opens the regular city council meeting. Tulsa has a tradition (like many other cities) of asking religious leaders to come in an lead the gathering in prayer before the business of the meeting is dealt with.

According to the article, persons representing the Tulsa Interfaith Alliance approached the chaplain who coordinates the religious leaders who volunteer to pray. They approached him in the interest of inclusiveness. Karl Sniderman said that he and another TIA board member attended a council meeting that was opened by a person who prayed in Jesus' name. Sniderman goes on to say, "I'm Jewish and she's Muslim, and it kind of irked us."

This conversation led to the decision by the coordinating chaplain to not allow prayers that were prayed in Jesus' name. Anyone who could not in good conscience abide by this condition is being asked to decline to offer the prayer.

This was brought to my attention by a parishioner. I have also been following along with one of the local talk radio stations. According to conversations and interviews with city council members, the city council was not aware of this decision.

The issue at hand is that praying in the name of Jesus is exclusive. It excludes people of other faiths. A prayer can be offered with other names for God being used. But the use of Jesus' name is not to be used. The article states that religious leaders who did not comply with this condition have been removed from the rotation.

This article has a companion piece. The following information was taken from the Tulsa World and, as one reader has pointed out, is not correct in its details. Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt was court martialed by the U.S. Navy for offering a prayer in Jesus' name, in violation of a U.S. Navy policy. Klingenschmitt challenged that policy, and Congress agreed with him, forcing the Navy to change the policy.Klingenschmitt has gone on to become an advocate for public prayer and the inclusion of the name of Jesus.

This has led me to a study of the subject of using the name of the Lord. I have prayed many years with the familiar, "...in the name of Jesus, amen." It was something that I had been given through my faith heritage. I had never heard teachings or opinions on this until recently. But it was something that I did.

So my study has begun on this subject. Of course, I wanted to begin with the subject of prayer. This is the pressing issue. So I began to study all of the passages of the New Testament that refer to the name of Jesus. And not once in the entire New Testament are Christians commanded, urged, exhorted, or asked to pray in the name of Jesus.

Before you go ripping into me, get a concordance and look up every passage that uses the word "name". You will find over 900 uses of the word name in the entire Bible. You will find 190 uses in the New Testament alone. In none of these passages, from Jesus' words in the Gospels to Paul's words in the letters to John's words in the Revelation, does it say that believers are to pray "in Jesus' name" explicitly.

There are a host of other things that we ARE to do and MAY do in Jesus' name. We ARE to:
believe in Jesus' name (John 1:12; 3:18; 20:31; 1 John 3:23)
baptize in the name of Jesus {and the Father and the Spirit} (Matthew 28:19; Acts 8:16; 10:48; 19:5)
give thanks always in Jesus' name(Ephesians 5:20)
glorify God in Jesus' name when we suffer for his sake(1 Peter 4:16)
avoid those who live an unruly life not in keeping with the faith passed down (1 Thessalonian 3:6)


Some of the things we MAY do in the name of Jesus include:
receive a child (Matthew 18:5)
gather with others (Matthew 18:20)
perform miracles (Mark 9:39; 16:17; Acts 3:6; 16:18; Luke 10:17)
speak boldly (Acts 4-5; 9:27-28)
proclaim repentance for the forgiveness of sins for all nations (Luke 24:47)


I believe that the idea of praying in Jesus' name is grounded in these few passages of scripture:
In John's Gospel during the final instructions to the disciples Jesus tells the disciples that they will be able to ask for anything and that Jesus would do it and the Father will give them whatever they ask in Jesus' name. (John 14: 13, 14; John 15:16; John 16:23-24)
Paul instructs the believing Gentiles in Colossians to do everything, by word or deed, in Jesus' name (Colossians 3:17)


These passages would seem to be the source of the tradition of praying in Jesus' name. We also have the example of the disciples using the name of Jesus to produce miracles. But I would remind you that at no point is there a command to pray in Jesus' name.

In fact, Jesus tells us, explicitly, whose name we are to pray in. Matthew 6:9 and Luke 11:2 record the prayer which Jesus offered to the disciples as a model for their prayer. In that prayer, which we call The Lord's Prayer, Jesus explicitly prays in the name of God the Father. "Our Father...hallowed be YOUR name." The model prayer that Jesus gave to the disciples that they could pray themselves was prayed in the name of God.

Toward the end of Jesus' ministry, he again models a prayer in which the name of God (Father) is used. In addition, you see that Jesus' prayer is intensely relational. He speaks of the oneness that Father and Son share. He prays of the sharing of glory, name, lives, and love between God and himself. This is, in it's being recorded by John, another model for prayer. We learn to pray by hearing what and how Jesus prayed. And his prayers were prayed in the name of the Father.

Now, about the exhortation of Jesus to pray in his name and receive it, there is a wide range of teaching. Some believe that this means if we pray for anything then Jesus or the Father will provide. I don't feel confidant enough to argue this point, yet. I will approach it in an upcoming blog, though. But I am confidant enough to say that prayer is NOT just asking God for whatever we want (whether good or bad).

Prayer is a relational link that we have with God the Father through Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. When we pray we are coming into fellowship with all three persons of the Trinity. The Spirit, who dwells with us, has connected us to Jesus Christ who intercedes on our behalf with God the Father. In turn, God the Father speaks to us through the word and life of Jesus Christ that is communicated by the Holy Spirit into our hearts, minds, and spirits.

Prayer is that ongoing relational link. When we pray, we are already coming in Jesus' name. We are coming in that name because we have believed in his name (John 20:31). We are coming in that name because we have been justified in his name (1 Corinthians 6:11). The life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ has already brought us into his life and his authority.

To go out in someone's name or to do something in someone's name is not to go around saying that name in order to cause something to happen. It means to bear the authority of the one in whose name you are going. When Peter heals the lame man, it is not the name of Jesus that heals him. It is the authority that Jesus has given to Peter. When Paul casts the spirit out of the girl who is a fortune teller, it is not the name of Jesus that causes the spirit to leave her. It is the authority of who Jesus is.

To pray in Jesus' name has become, in the most innocuous form, a matter of rote ritual or habit or, in its most dangerous form, magical incantation. If we pray in Jesus' name then we should be mindful that our prayers are carrying the full weight and authority of the identity of the King of Kings, the name to which every knee will bow. But the use of the words "in Jesus' name" are not a requirement in order to live out the relational link we have with God the Father, Son, and Spirit through prayer.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Todd,

Your article seems to be well researched except for the one glaring mistake about Gordon Klingenschmitt. He was not courtmartialed for praying in Jesus' name, but rather for disobeying a lawful order, namely wearing his uniform at a partisan or political event. There is a simple reason for this. The military serves at the pleasure of the civilians and not vice-versa. Wearing a uniform at a political event would give the wrong impression that the military endorses a course. The military must remain politically nuetral. It took a jury only a couple of hours to reach the proper verdict. There are plenty of chaplains who have prayed in Jesus' name who have faced no repercussions. Simply put, he was a person who chose to die in the wrong foxhole. To say that he sacrificed his career is nonsense. The day that Chaplains are told that they can't pray in Jesus' name is when you will find a revolt within the Chaplain Corps. Working in an institutional ministry, however, our thought is to embrace the total congregation that God has given us. If a Chaplain does his/her job properly, it is after the prayer, after the ceremony that the doors of opportunity are often wide open. Too many Christians have been accepting the lies of Klingenschmitt without checking out the actual facts.
latoberg said…
Thank you for that information. Unfortunately, I decided to use the information as it was presented in the Tulsa World and did not fact check for myself. I admit to being ignorant of the circumstances of Klingenschmitt. And now I have to apologize to readers for using a errant source.
Anonymous said…
Funny how anonymous said: "The day that Chaplains are told that they can't pray in Jesus' name is when you will find a revolt within the Chaplain Corps." They why didn't he revolt alongside Klingenschmitt?

When the Secretary of the Navy signed a policy SECNAVINST 1730.7C telling chaplains their prayers should be "non-sectarian" and redefining "public worship" as only safe inside the chapel, Klingenschmitt revolted by violating that exact same policy, which was enforced against him by the Navy Judge during his court-martial. The Navy Judge ruled that because of SECNAVINST 1730.7C that "public worship" was only safe inside a Sunday chapel, but since Chaplain Klingenschmitt prayed in uniform outside a Sunday chapel, that's not "public worship" but it's "worshipping in public" and therefore illegal under that policy, which empowered commanders to give otherwise unlawful orders and punish chaplains for worshipping Jesus publicly in uniform.

There is no dispute he demanded his own court-martial for violating that policy, and dared the Navy to enforce it, which they did, to their shame, and to great public outrage.

That's why one month later the U.S. Congress agreed with the American people (who supported Klingenschmitt), and rescinded the same bad prayer policy, SECNAVINST 1730.7C, forcing the Navy to restore freedom and allow "sectarian" prayers, even in uniform, even in public, even outside of chapel.

Because Congress agreed with Klingenschmitt's stand, Navy Chaplains are free again to pray publicly "in Jesus name."

These facts are well documented at his web-site, www.persuade.tv, and so is a petition to reinstate Chaplain Klingenschmitt in the Navy, since the SECNAV refused to "grandfather" that legislative change back to his case, and he was honorably discharged.

Apparently the Tulsa World article was accurate, despite the now apparent lies by people like Chaplain Steve Dundas, an obsessed fan now stalking Klingenschmitt everywhere on the internet.
latoberg said…
I appreciate the issues that you both bring to the discussion. But if you are going to make this a personal battle, at least have the integrity to post with a name and not under anonymous.

Thank you.
John said…
The obvious solution to the city council problem is to eliminate praying entirely. Why is this a necessary prerequisite for civic business?

Popular posts from this blog

This is Really Me...graphic information of an uncomfortable type enclosed.

I really hope that enough people have stopped following that this is really just a declaration into the winds of a few hearts. I have been silent because my life is in an ebb and flow of chaos. Professionally, I am reaching my end as a local church pastor. I have lost any desire to lead people who have no desire to go anywhere. Relationally, I am losing my connection to all of the people closest to me: family, friends, mentors. I am sitting here, writing this in despair and broken. I have nothing left to lose, so I want to tell you about my real self. This is me. The person I see in my mind when I envision my true self. I'm not drop dead gorgeous, but I'm beautiful.  I'm not graceful and elegant, but I'm gentle and fragile. I'm not going to steal anyone's heart, but my heart has been broken and needs to heal. I don't want to be seen as a freak, but I realize I live in a culture that can't handle what it doesn't understand. I want to be loved...

What dreams may come

Now it's time to say goodbye To all our company.... The Mickey Mouse Club closed out it's episodes by singing this tune. I feel the time has come to sing this song for my blog. It isn't that I don't have anything say. It has more to do with my change and changing life.  I am still very much a postmodern - even though that word is not used anymore. Modernity has slipped and is a shadow of the past. Where we are now is cultural revolution. We are in the midst of it. Those who have moved on from what we were are now trying to establish the foothold for climbing to a place of cultural security. Meanwhile those who hold onto what we were are grabbing at the last places we have moved beyond. At the same time, they are pulling at the shoelaces of those who have moved upward, trying to dislodge our forward and upward advance.  I am still very much a renaissance person - but not for the sake of others. I still like having a connection to as many subjects as possible. A little bi...

Taste of Sex and Gender

Well, my last post seemed to be a little offensive, defensive, or negative to some readers. Sorry to scare the few of you who read it. I'm just feeling a bit negative about the trajectory of the nation and how much people don't really care for peace, justice, or coming to terms with differences. Today, I want to make some notes on something that I'm working out. Gender and sexuality have become topics of reading and reflection for me since coming out. There is a lot of confusion about the two. I have been trying to develop an image to help people get the way that gender and sexuality are different. I also see a lot of people trying to keep them separate categories. That isn't fair. There are overlapping concerns between gender and sexuality that require keeping them in connection while dealing with them as separate aspects of personhood. So here is my crazy "shower idea". Gender and sexuality can be compared to tasting something. When you taste something, ther...