Pennsylvania State House Invocation

[Haruo]

Astoundingly overladen with Jesus' Name (with occasional little twists of grammar making it sound, out of context, like she is claiming to be Jesus). Not nearly as worrisome to me as the rule against non-Christian clergy attending their condemned fellow believers in Texas and Alabama, but still pretty worrisome. The session in question involved the swearing in of PA's first female Muslim House Member.

[KeithE]

[William Thornton]

I rather think gummit telling people how to pray, whether or not the prayer may include the name of Jesus, how many times, etc., is far worse than what some critics label an inappropriate prayer. These are all adults not crybaby children. Let the legislature either have a prayer and take what they get or not have a prayer.

[KeithE]

[Haruo]

[Rvaughn]

[Sandy]

Interesting. That's a familiar scene for me. I was involved in legislative advocacy for school choice in Pennsylvania for the last six years I lived there, and have been in that room many times, and I've met both Rep. Borowicz and Speaker Mike Turzai, who is standing immediately to her right. I've sat through several opening sessions in both the PA house and senate, and while I don't think I've heard a prayer that was as blatantly intended to make a political propaganda statement like that, it has become a pretty common practice for those who volunteer to pray to make political statements in their prayers or even to advocate for particular legislation during a prayer. They used to have a rotation of ministers come in to do it, but that was ruled as an unconstitutional establishment of religion. So they have members volunteer to lead the prayer. I'm not aware that the Pennsylvania House has any Muslim members. There are several Jewish members, a scattering of "Evangelicals" and mainline Protestants and lots of Catholics, a couple of Unitarians, a few Quakers and, just a guess, a majority who claim affiliation but aren't active in any sort of practice of their faith. I wouldn't call this a "prayer," since nothing in it was really addressed to God, but its hard to tell how that speaking slot has been used prior to this that prompted her to do the same thing.

This is a pretty good example of why those who are not believers have such a negative perspective of Christians, particularly conservative Christians. They blame the mainstream media for all of the bad publicity but the fact of the matter is that they do this to themselves with stuff like this.

[William Thornton]

Otoh, if you ask a rep to pray who gets to approve or disapprove the prayer? Don't like it? Ignore it. Public prayers for gummit events are mostly throwaways anyway.

[Sandy]

[Haruo]

My understanding was that the decision to switch from outside pray-ers ("clergy") to members of the House was not in order to avoid having the prayer judicially banned, but in order to avoid having to include pray-ers of religious viewpoints (e.g. secular humanism, atheism, perhaps Islam or Buddhism*) that were intentionally excluded from the rotation in the rotation.

[William Thornton]

Sandy: I have no problem with the legislature setting parameters on what can be said by a legislator opening the session with a "prayer."

Now this is shocking.

[Dave Roberts]

As long as we pretend to live in Christendom, these events will occur.

[Rvaughn]

I don't think it is inappropriate for people to pray according to their sincerely held religious beliefs just because someone is present who holds different beliefs. If so, then one would also have to conclude that it will be inappropriate for the new Muslim member of the legislature to volunteer and pray according to her sincerely held religious beliefs. As for Rep. Borowicz's prayer (regardless of what suspicions I might have), I cannot judge whether she prayed according to her sincerely held religious beliefs. I don't know her heart, her beliefs, or how she normally prays. That doesn't keep me from thinking her prayer was weird, according to my own standards.

What is inappropriate to confiscate the paragon of prayer as a platform for political pablum in place of petition to God. With William, I'd agree public prayers for government events "are mostly throwaways."

[Dave Roberts]

[Sandy]

[Rvaughn]

[Sandy]

[Rvaughn]

[Sandy]

Note that my comment said "by the evidence or the obvious. This is the Pennsylvania legislature, where there is no position on US support for Israel, or for any of the other right wing positions she managed to work into her prayer. "That's the way I always pray?" Maybe so, though I doubt it. But here's what's obvious. She chose this particular legislative session to volunteer to open in prayer, where the swearing in of the first Muslim member was on the agenda. Her words and her body language are sending the message she wants to send. I think she very clearly stated and showed us what was in her heart and BTW, hasn't denied it.

Apparently most of the legislature, including members of her own party, came to the same conclusion.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... d3c8ad728b

Objections to instructions by the legislators as to the content of prayers are unfounded and hypocritical. The Pennsylvania house already had rules favoring those of one particular religion when it came to the content of a prayer, and restrictions on those who would be allowed to recite them.

There's no tongue in cheek smilie here, but tsk, tsk, tsk, look what happens when you let a woman take off her head covering and give her a mic to lead a prayer.

[Rvaughn]

[Sandy]

After the fact, a few Republicans and supporters defending her is not a surprise.

I do not believe that a prayer at the beginning of a legislative session has to be an empty formality or a sham, putting on a show. If you've been asked to open a legislative session with prayer, then the content of your prayer would be to start by praying for the forgiveness of your own sin so that you are able to be a channel of prayer, pray for God's presence and guidance, for the legislators who are open to his leading to be discerning with their words and their votes, for their safety during the session, intercede for those who need it, or who have family members who need it. Offer up words of praise and worship to encourage and assist those who are also genuinely praying. Pray for the legislature to get to the correct choice on issues, particularly the tough, divisive ones and pray that political disagreement doesn't rupture relationships. Close in Jesus' name if you choose and that's the way you normally would. No problem praying for specific government officials mentioned by name, regardless of party. All of that could have been done here, including praying for the new house member's discernment and peace, and the safety of her and her family, without the prayer being a sham or an empty formality.

Using a prayer to laud the president for his Israel policy, which was just a statement, turned the prayer into a political formality. The Pennsylvania legislature does not have anything to do with national relations to Israel, so why would that be in the content of a prayer in that forum? That would be like pulling out your personal prayer list with all of your sick relatives and friends and personal prayer requests on it and praying for each one by name and their condition in front of your whole congregation.

You can see the reaction of those in the video, including Speaker Turzai, who was standing next to her, and who gave her a couple of looks that said "cut it off" before touching her elbow to shut her up. And as a Christian, under any directive of scripture, she clearly offended the new Muslim house member, who said so, politely and respectfully.

[William Thornton]

Problem here is Sandy: "have no problem with the legislature setting parameters on what can be said by a legislator opening the session with a "prayer.","

Who else here believes gummit should set parameters on legislative prayers?

[Sandy]

[William Thornton]

[Haruo]