Interfaith prayers are a chance
to recall spiritual bonds
of community

---

By Rev. Mike Young

Mitch Kahle of Citizens for the Separation of State and Church has challenged the invocations before the City Council. Similar challenges to public prayers in governmental setting will surely follow. There are good reasons beyond the constitutional ones Mitch raises for examining our practice in such events.

Those of us who are called upon to lead in prayer in a public setting have a challenge before us different from those who pray only within their own faith community.

Our communities are very diverse, and many people are uncomfortable about the use of narrow sectarian prayers on public occasions.

To be led in sectarian prayer, even by someone with the best of intentions, when you are not a follower of that religious tradition leaves you feeling excluded from the group by the very act intended to create inclusion.

Therefore, our task as prayer leader is to find the images that call forth a sense of the presence of the Holy for that particular community. Just as praying in Swahili would be inappropriate with a community that understood no Swahili, so praying in Jesus' name would be inappropriate with a community that included Jews, Buddhists, Muslims or non-Trinitarian Christians.

I take the purpose of an invocation to an interfaith public gathering to be calling them into awareness as a community with common interests and concerns, and with commitments to pursue those interests and concerns according to a particular set of common values.

That is to say, an invocation attempts to get a group of people to think of themselves and to behave as a community. There appear to be four general ways to do invocations in interfaith public gatherings:

>> The first is the way it is too often done. A person, lay or clergy, delivers a prayer in the language of their particular religious tradition. Those who are not a part of that tradition may politely ignore the event, or they may be to one degree or another offended and alienated by it.

But they are unlikely to feel more included, more aware of their commitments to the common interests, concerns and values, more a part of the community. For them, the spirit of dissension has been invoked.

>> The second is for the prayer leader to seek language that is neutral with respect to the various traditions present. But the likelihood is that it becomes awkward. Either the language offends, or it is so generic as to cease to have any significance.

Indeed, the language itself often becomes the focus of attention. Such "To whom it may concern" prayers acknowledge and celebrate neither what we hold in common nor the richness of our diversity. Its very blandness itself becomes an offense. And for many religious traditions, it simply isn't praying.

>> The third way is for the prayer leader to acknowledge that the community represents many different points of view on religious matters, then invite the hearers to pray in their own way as the leader leads in prayer in his or her own tradition.

This way of public prayer allows the community to acknowledge and celebrate at the same time its common elements and its diversity. It permits us to feel included in our diversity, rather than despite it.

Further, it permits those who are being led in prayer to pray authentically. It requires from the prayer leader only a brief paragraph of introduction.

>> Finally, the prayer leader may become the guide for a diverse community at prayer, rather than the one doing their praying for them.

As in the third way above, the leader begins by acknowledging the differences within the group and invites them to follow in their own way.

The leader then guides them through a process of holding up, acknowledgment and intention appropriate to what the community is gathered for.

Click for online
calendars and events.