Posted on 04/03/2003 6:25:58 PM PST by honway
A Maryland minister was barred from giving the opening prayer in the state Senate after he refused to drop a reference to Jesus.
The Rev. David N. Hughes of the Trinity and Evangelical Church of Adamstown, Md., intended to round out his invocation yesterday with the line, "In Jesus' name, Amen." But the sergeant at arms – on the orders of Senate President Thomas Mike Miller Jr. – shut the reverend out of the body's chambers.
Miller issued the orders after two Jewish lawmakers threatened to stage a boycott of the legislative session if the phrase was not removed.
"I'm shocked by the response. I've never had this happen in 26 years," Hughes told the Frederick News-Post. "It just makes me feel that they've taken away my right as an American to pray, and this is the seat of government, and that's scary."
The pastor – a Vietnam veteran – was invited to give the prayer by Republican Sen. Alex Mooney. Hughes was Mooney's fourth guest. The other three were Jewish rabbis.
Opening up legislative sessions with prayer is a longstanding tradition in Maryland, as it is in states across the country. Mooney told WorldNetDaily no one had been barred from giving an invocation before. He sees irony in yesterday's "censorship."
Maryland state Republican Rep. Alex Mooney
"We were the first state to address religious tolerance in our state charter," he told WorldNetDaily. "This just shows a lack of tolerance for peoples' religious views."
Mooney recalled numerous instances of invocations referencing Jesus throughout the four years that he has been in office.
But at the beginning of the session this year, a string of invocations by Baptist preachers invoking the name Jesus Christ sparked debate on the issue. Miller appealed to lawmakers for tolerance and urged they stick to guidelines that call for invocations to be of an ecumenical nature and respectful of all faiths.
Webster's New World Dictionary defines ecumenical as "promoting cooperation or better understanding among differing religious faiths."
Since the debate, the Senate clerk screens prayers ahead of time and flagged the written text submitted by Hughes.
When Sens. Ida Ruben and Gloria Hollinger – both of whom are Jewish – heard of the reference, they asked Mooney to strike it.
"I said, 'Hey, I'll let him pray however he wants to pray. I'm not going to censor him and tell him how he needs to pray,'" Mooney told WND.
Ruben told the Frederick News-Post she then urged Hughes to substitute "messiah" for Jesus, telling him the reference could offend non-Christians and goes against the guidelines.
Neither Ruben nor Miller returned calls seeking comment.
"This is part of my faith," Hughes responded, according to Mooney. "The Gospel says when you pray, pray in Jesus' name."
The senators next asked to be excused from the floor during the prayer.
Paradoxically, a walk-out over a Muslim cleric's prayer opening a Washington state legislative session last month backfired on one Christian lawmaker.
Washington state Republican Rep. Lois McMahan
As WorldNetDaily reported, Rep. Lois McMahan, a Republican from Gig Harbor, Wash., refused to participate in the prayer and declared, "My god is not Muhammed."
"The Islamic religion is so ... part and parcel with the attack on America. I just didn't want to be there, be a part of that," she said in an interview with the Seattle Post Intelligencer. "Even though the mainstream Islamic religion doesn't profess to hate America, nonetheless it spawns the groups that hate America."
But a day later, McMahan apologized on the floor of the state House of Representatives amid mounting furor over her stance.
Debate over invocations is raging elsewhere in the country. As WorldNetDaily reported, several Southern California cities are grappling with threats from both sides of the issue.
Under pressure from the American Civil Liberties Union to quit using the name Jesus Christ in invocations, the city of Lake Elsinore, in Riverside County, decided to eliminate mention of "religious figures." The decree subsequently had the apparent effect of eliminating the prayer altogether, as no local pastors would accept invitations to deliver the prayer, and city councilors adopted moments of silence instead.
The ACLU contends that praying at the request of a government entity is a violation of the First Amendment's prohibition against the establishment of religion.
But the nonprofit United States Justice Foundation, which threatened to sue the city if it failed to reverse its decision, maintains telling a pastor what to pray is a violation of his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and religion.
The notion of "separation of church and state" is derived from the dissenting opinion of the 1946 Supreme Court case Everson vs. Board of Education, which upheld a program allowing parents to be repaid from state funds for the costs of transportation to private religious schools. The court required only that the state maintain neutrality in its relations with various groups of religious believers.
"The decision in Everson does not rise to the level of being a battle cry for those who would wish to remove every vestige of religion from the public forum," USJF litigation counsel Richard Ackerman asserts.
"There's a push in this country to remove religion from society," Mooney echoed, "from the Supreme Court's decision on the Pledge to the ACLU going after all the Ten Commandments posted across the country. ... Nothing in the church-state relationship allows censorship and the removal of religious values from society."
(I thought the ONE was three?)
That is merely your concocted "evidence", not proof of what you assert.
But don't give up too easily. Check the Yellow Pages for an ad that reads something like "Prayers customized to suit your fancy. We will pray to a rock, a rooster, the sun or a cockatoo. Since we stand for nothing, nothing offends us. You can sure we will not offend anyone, except those who do".
We have a whole generation of such who troll their way through life seeking to position themselves in such a way as to maximize their possibility of being offended. FR is full of them (including some of the moderators).
Matthew 10:32 "Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven."
You mean accepted the censorship of the bigots? You and Saddam are on the same page, it would seem ---- no tolerance for other beliefs.
According to the Bible it works like this:
When a Christian prays Jesus Christ is the ONLY mediator and the Holy Spirit is the ONLY intercessor. Christ alone died for our sins since no mere mortal was capable of perfection other than Jesus in the Bible or in this age. Because of man being incapable of perfection in keeping God's laws reconciliation was not possible (2 Cor. 5:19). The Holy Spirit did not die for our sins; He prays to the Father on our behalf, based on the redeeming work of Jesus Christ. Furthermore the intercessor, the Holy Spirit, is NOT in heaven as is Christ as Christ's work is (1 John 2:12). Rather , it is in US of we follow Christ. The indwelling Holy Spirit pleads in us to the father on the grounds of hte mediating work of His Son, Jesus Christ.
Hope that clarifies how a Christian prays to Jesus. Any questions, e-mail me on FR. Otherwise your reply will be unanaswered. These threads become so unwieldy that I usually don't waste my time on them. The ignorance displayed here is enough to give any Christian spiritual nightmares.
No, it's bigots who want to censor the preacher. They can listen respectfully, just as the atheists in the chamber must do when Jews or Christians or Muslims or anyone else says a prayer. This anti-Christian hysteria is crap, and the bigots need to be called on it. If you're tempted to be bigoted, you should reconsider. I'm Christian, and I've sat respectfully through prayers of other religions; whatever happened to simple tolerance - - or is hatred of Christianity so strong that tolerance can't be extended to Christians?
No, it's YOU and Saddam who are on the same page.
No tolerance for dem Joos!
except for Christians, who aren't allowed to speak their own prayers in public. I'm one, and I wouldn't raise a ruckus if a Buddhist were giving an invocation;; why can't you bear to hear a christian profess his faith? If we really are the free-conscience multi-belief society you say, then why can't you allow others to express their beliefs?
What an asinine statement. You're the one who objects to somebody professing their faith - - - I don't; if a Rabbi or a Buddhist or a Hindu were giving the invocation, I'd be respectful and tolerant. Because I object to a couple of bigots who won't extend the same tolerance to my faith -- that earns me a smear from you? It's you, bub, who don't have tolerance for others - -- but you sure are quick with the foul smear.
Maybe you do.
I think this whole argument is ridiculous.
I'm off this thread, as it's nothing but sniping, carping, and Pharisaism.
According to the Bible it works like this:
I need to be clearer than in my last reply. FIrst off:
! Timothy 2:5 states this:
[5] For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Romans 8:26 states this:
[26] Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
When a Christian prays to Jesus Christ, Jesus is the mediator and the Holy Spirit is the intercessor. Christ alone died for our sins since no mere mortal was capable of perfection either in the Bible or today. To state otherwise calls God a liar. Because of man being incapable of perfection, spiritually or otherwise, in keeping God's laws reconciliation was not possible (2 Cor. 5:19).
2 Cor. 5:19 states:
[19] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
The Holy Spirit did not die for our sins; He prays to the Father on our behalf, based on the redeeming work of Jesus Christ. Furthermore the intercessor, the Holy Spirit, is NOT in heaven as is Christ's work is (1 John 2:1,2).
1 John 2:1,2 states
[1] My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
[2] And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Rather , it is in US of we follow Christ. The indwelling Holy Spirit pleads in us to the father on the grounds of hte mediating work of His Son, Jesus Christ.
Hope that clarifies how a Christian prays to Jesus. Any questions, e-mail me on FR. Otherwise your reply will be unanaswered. These threads become so unwieldy that I usually don't waste my time on them. The ignorance displayed here is enough to give any Christian spiritual nightmares.
As mentioned privately, Christians only pray to the living God; not dead fallible mortals. And the above shows from the Bible just what transpires when a Christian prays. I put the Word of God over the flawed word of man and all of this is from the Bible.
According to the Bible it works like this:
I need to be clearer than in my last reply. First off:
Timothy 2:5 states this:
[5] For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Romans 8:26 states this:
[26] Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
When a Christian prays to Jesus Christ, Jesus is the mediator and the Holy Spirit is the intercessor. Christ alone died for our sins since no mere mortal was capable of perfection either in the Bible or today. To state otherwise calls God a liar. Because of man being incapable of perfection, spiritually or otherwise, in keeping God's laws reconciliation was not possible (2 Cor. 5:19).
2 Cor. 5:19 states this:
[19] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
The Holy Spirit did not die for our sins; He prays to the Father on our behalf, based on the redeeming work of Jesus Christ. Furthermore the intercessor, the Holy Spirit, is NOT in heaven as is Christ's work is (1 John 2:1,2).
1 John 2:1,2 states:
[1] My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
[2] And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Rather, it is in US of we follow Christ. The indwelling Holy Spirit pleads in us to the father on the grounds of hte mediating work of His Son, Jesus Christ.
Hope that clarifies how a Christian prays to Jesus. Any questions, e-mail me on FR. Otherwise your reply will be unanaswered. These threads become so unwieldy that I usually don't waste my time on them. The ignorance displayed here is enough to give any Christian spiritual nightmares.
As mentioned privately, Christians only pray to the living God; not dead fallible mortals. And the above shows from the Bible just what transpires when a Christian prays. I put the Word of God over the flawed word of man and all of this is from the Bible.
Best Regards,
Praying in the name of Jesus is just an exercise in free speech. We've reached an ominous moment if it's become unacceptable. When did Christianity become such a hateful thing that one can't even voice a prayer in the standard Christian formulation -- - - or defend another's right to do so without being called an anti-semite as you just smeared me?
Why the hatred of Christianity? Again, if a Buddhist got up and gave an invocation, I wouldn't even think of saying he's "rubbing it in my face." I'm secure enough in my beliefs that I could calmly listen, just as I listen to a lot of stuff I don't agree with. Why is Christianity not allowed such a tolerant mature treatment from others these days?
Did you know that the Constitution ends with the words anno domini - - in the year of our Lord? Likewise every presidential proclamation? I'm not saying that's good or bad - - just that the idea that public references to Christianity are not new, only the proposition that such references are EVIL or BAD is new, and that's a disturbing development. Too bad you're going along with the crowd who want to censor mentions of Christ from public conversation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.