In this episode Camden Bucey welcomes Dr. Jonathan Master, president of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary and host of the new podcast Dead Presbyterians Society. Together, they reflect on the theology and practice of public prayer, drawing upon the insights of 19th-century Presbyterian theologian Samuel Miller and his underappreciated classic, Thoughts on Public Prayer.

The conversation addresses the enduring importance of prayer in the public ministry of the church. Dr. Master discusses why pastors must be both God’s mouthpiece to the people through preaching and the people’s mouthpiece to God through prayer. The episode includes a full episode of Dead Presbyterian Society, in which Master offers a deep and moving treatment of Miller’s work—highlighting frequent faults in public prayer, the characteristics of excellent prayer, and the secret devotional habits that sustain it.

Whether you’re a pastor, elder, seminarian, or thoughtful church member, this episode is a call to recover the dignity, order, and spiritual power of public prayer in Reformed worship.

Watch on YouTube

Chapters

• 00:00:07 Introduction
• 00:04:53 Introducing Dead Presbyterians Society
• 00:21:22 Dead Presbyterians Society, Episode 5
• 00:47:28 The Relative Lack of Attention Given to Public Prayer
• 01:01:44 How to Grow in Public Prayer
• 01:06:05 Reading Books to Help Think More Biblically
• 01:08:30 Conclusion

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jonathan Master

In part two of Paul’s Prayer we return to consider Paul’s prayer for the Ephesian believers. Yes, Paul’s burden is that the Ephesian believers would know the Lord. But what specifically does he pray for them? What specifically, in this passage, does he want them to know? Join us as we reflect on Paul’s — and the Lord’s — burden for his people.

Participants: Mark A. Winder, Robert Arendale

In part one of Paul’s Prayer, we will examine how the apostle Paul prays for the Spirit to be at work so that Christians can know God more. Paul’s thankfulness for the believers at Ephesus moves him to constant prayer that God would soften their hearts and open their eyes to hear and believe the gospel. This should be our burden in prayer: that we would know God more.

Participants: Mark A. Winder, Robert Arendale

We take the podcast on the road for three episodes to visit Reformed Theological Seminary in Atlanta, Georgia. In our first episode of the road trip, we speak with Dr. Guy Richard about his book Persistent Prayer (P&R, 2021). This book is in P&R’s Blessings of the Faith series. This book will prove useful to pastors, elders, and study groups as it provides encouragement and instruction regarding prayer and its blessings.

Dr. Guy M. Richard is President and Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Reformed Theological Seminary in Atlanta.

Links

• Christ the Center, episode 83 — The Theology of Samuel Rutherford

Chapters

• 00:00 Introduction
• 02:10 About RTS Atlanta
• 07:01 An Update on Samuel Rutherford Scholarship
• 08:21 The Importance of Persistent Prayer
• 11:02 Prayer and Pastoral Ministry
• 14:59 A Definition of Prayer
• 20:43 The Psalter and Prayer
• 26:39 The Grace and Intimacy of Prayer
• 32:18 Prayer and Fasting
• 38:01 Prayer and the Armor of God
• 41:24 Encouraging the Prayerless
• 48:02 Conclusion

Participants: Camden Bucey, Guy Richard, Will Wood

In this review, we consider CM, Christian Meditation: What the Bible Teaches about Meditation and Spiritual Excercises by Edmund P. Clowney and published by Regent College Publishing.

Writing in 1977, Edmund P. Clowney addressed the growing popularity of transcendental meditation (TM). TM started to develop roots in America in the 1960s and took off in part due to high-profile endorsements, including one from The Beatles. You may be tempted to think this is old news and a long-passed fad, yet with the rise of meditation apps such as Headspace, Calm, or Sam Harris’s Waking Up, Clowney still has much to say for our contemporary context.

This book’s 108 pages are divided into four major sections: (1) TM Challenges the Christian Church (2) The Yoga of Discipleship (3) The Delight of Communion, and (4) The Practice of Praise.

As Clowney unpacks the details of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi’s system of TM, he pulls no punches, remarking that no Christian could partake of the initiation ceremony without violating the second commandment given that gurus are venerated and the Hindu gods are invoked (p. 8). Such candor is refreshing and timely. In our present day, people seek to approach meditation from a purely secular vantage point, which may lead many Christians to think these spiritual disciplines are neutral or at least compatible or reclaimable within a Christian worldview. But there are deeper matters at stake. This is not a mere matter of form but also one of spiritual substance.

The discipline of TM, for example, is rooted in Hindu monistic philosophy. Clowney writes,

Stages have been marked out in gaining this [transcendental] experience. First is the state of pure awareness. In this state we are no longer aware of any thing or idea but only of awareness itself. The repetition of a word or syllable aids in this, for the mantra first blocks out all other ideas and then loses all meaning or suggestive power of its own. The resulting state of mind is called transcendental consciousness. Beyond this lie cosmic consciousness, God-consciousness, and unity consciousness. These are progressive steps in a “pure” awareness that experiences identity with the cosmos and the absolute. The oneness with the absolute that the Maharishi pictures as the goal of human destiny is really the opposite of Christian fellowship with the living God. It is not the experience of knowing God but the delusion of being God.

Clowney, 9.

In other words, it is pantheistic. It is directly opposed to the wonder and joy we come to experience through covenant. It fundamentally misses what Geerhardus Vos called the deeper Protestant conception. It also presupposes that God cannot be known except through this transcendental experience via a different type of consciousness. Yet God has revealed himself to us. Even his invisible attributes, namely his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived through the things that have been made (Rom. 1:20). Clowney explains how Christian meditation is (1) rooted in God’s truth, (2) responds to the love of God, and (3) is an excercise of praise unto him.

It is critical for Christians to be self-conscious about their practices. The type of meditation described in God’s word can bring focus to our lives especially when we have become complacent, living on auto-pilot. Clowney remarks,

But too often, through lack of meditation, Christians become secularized and their capacity to see the world before the Lord shrivels. It is not a fixed stare at a stone or a tree that aids meditation. Such fixity leads to illusion not perception. But a focused seeing, a contemplative examination of both the richness and reality of one of God’s works—that is productive if done in fellowship with the Creator. If you are looking for a place to begin, try meditating on your own hand—not on one spot, but on your whole hand as God’s creation. Read Psalm 139, then look at your hand again. Write down some of your reflections. Then praise God for your hand, claim his cleansing of your hand, and seek his blessing on it (cf. Ps. 90:17). How will you use it in his service?

Clowney, 41.

When influential voices ranging from Tim Ferriss and Joe Rogan to Michael Pollan suggest or propose the use of psychedelics as a means for accessing a greater reality, Clowney reminds us that God’s word advocates for the reality of God’s presence accessible through his personal revelation. We do not need to escape ourselves, to disintegrate the ego, in order to commune with the triune God. We simply must seek him in spirit and in truth.

Clowney’s CM, Christian Meditation is a delightfully succinct yet significant book for our present moment. It is a call and encouragement for all Christians to take seriously their daily spiritual disciplines and to seek the Lord while he may be found (Isa. 55:6).

Participants: Camden Bucey

The Westminster Larger Catechism, Question and Answer 154 describes the ordinary and outwards means of grace as the Word, sacraments, and prayer. We discuss these ordinary means and how they apply to the day-to-day ministry of the local church.

Participants: Camden Bucey, Jeff Waddington, Jim Cassidy

Glen Clary and Camden Bucey discuss Ole Hallesby’s classic book on prayer. Hallesby was a Norwegian Lutheran, who taught at the Free University of Oslo. He wrote over sixty books in his lifetime, including his excellent book, Prayer. While this book is a twentieth-century classic, it is relatively unknown and unread in Reformed circles. We hope this discussion on prayer will compel you to consider more deeply the important work of prayer.

Links

• Jonathan Edwards, “God Glorified in Man’s Dependence“

Participants: Camden Bucey, Glen Clary

It’s not clear to me how the Confession of Sins and Prayer for Pardon [in Calvin’s liturgy] is compatible with the Reformed idea that man’s sins are completely forgiven at the moment of Justification and that God only views man in light of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to him. Why ask for forgiveness of sins every Sunday if you believe all your sins were already forgiven and that God never counts your sins against you?

It is true that Calvin’s liturgy—like the liturgies of Luther, Cranmer, Bucer, and Knox—included a Corporate Confession of Sin and Declaration of Pardon. In Calvin’s Strasbourg service, after the Confession of Sin, Calvin would deliver “some word of Scripture to console the conscience”; then, he would pronounce “the Absolution in this manner:”

Let each of you truly acknowledge that he is a sinner, humbling himself before God, and believe that the heavenly Father wills to be gracious unto him in Jesus Christ. To all those that repent in this wise, and look to Jesus Christ for their salvation, I declare that the absolution of sins is effected, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Calvin’s Strasbourg service followed the pattern of Martin Bucer’s liturgy, which began with a Confession of Sin followed by a “Word of Comfort” from holy scripture (1 Tim. 1:15; or John 3:16; 3:35–36; Acts 10:43; 1 John 2:1–2; etc.) and the “Absolution.”

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. Let everyone, with St. Paul, truly acknowledge this in his heart and believe in Christ. Thus, in His name, I proclaim unto you the forgiveness of all your sins, and declare you to be loosed of them on earth, that you be loosed of them also in heaven, in eternity. Amen.

Bucer’s liturgy makes it clear that the Absolution is an exercise of the keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 16:19; 18:18). As excommunication declares that the impenitent are bound by sins, absolution declares that the penitents are loosed from them. We find a similar pattern of Confession of Sin followed by an Absolution in the liturgies of Luther, Cranmer and Knox. How is it that Nick and Stellman can see so clearly what all these Reformers failed to see? The Confession of Faith that Stellman at one time believed and defended clearly explains why praying for forgiveness of sins every Lord’s Day does not contradict the Reformed doctrine of justification.

God doth continue to forgive the sins of those that are justified; and, although they can never fall from the state of justification, yet they may, by their sins, fall under God’s fatherly displeasure, and not have the light of his countenance restored unto them, until they humble themselves, confess their sins, beg pardon, and renew their faith and repentance (WCF 11:5)

J. G. Vos explains,

The justified person still can and daily does commit sin in thought, word and deed…. These “daily failings” cannot cancel his standing as a justified person; they cannot bring him into condemnation. But they can offend his heavenly Father, and cause him to withdraw the light of his countenance from the person’s soul for a time. They cannot destroy the believer’s union with God, but they can interrupt and weaken his communion with God. Therefore, the believer is daily to confess his sins and to pray for God’s pardon for his daily failings.

It is not uncommon for a drunken man to believe that he has a brilliant idea that no one else has ever thought of. His sober buddies, of course, realize that he’s making a fool of himself.

The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law (Deut. 29:29).

The decretive will of God cannot be successfully opposed or resisted (cf. Psalm 115:3; Dan. 4:35; Acts 2:23; Eph. 1:11).

I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, “My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose” (Isaiah 46:9–10). [God] has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” (Rom. 9:18–19).

There is also God’s preceptive will; that is, his precepts or commands. God’s preceptive will is made known in scripture. Unlike God’s decretive will (which cannot be successfully resisted), the preceptive will of God is constantly resisted and opposed by rebellious humanity (cf. Matt. 7:21; 12:50; 21:31; John 6:38; Heb. 13:20–21). The third petition of the Lord’s Prayer has in view both the secret will of God and his revealed will. As J. G. Vos says,

The third petition … refers both to the revealed will of God and to the secret will of God. We are to know and do the revealed will of God; we are to submit cheerfully to the secret will of God, that is, to the events of God’s providence. Thus the revealed will of God requires us to obey the Ten Commandments, to love God and our neighbor, etc., while submission to the secret will of God means that we will endure suffering, disappointments, hardships, bereavements, etc., patiently and without murmuring or rebelling against God.[1]

With regard to the revealed will of God, when we pray “Thy will be done,” we request, says Thomas Vincent, that “ourselves and others, who naturally are dark and ignorant of his will, may, by his Word and Spirit, be enabled to know and understand it” (cf. Eph. 5:17; Col. 1:9–10; Rom. 12:2). We also request that “ourselves and others, who naturally have in our hearts an enmity against God’s law, might be inclined and enabled to obey and do whatever it is the will of God to command” (cf. Rom. 8:7; Psalm 119:4–5, 35–36; 143:10).[2] With regard to the secret will of God, when we pray, “Thy will be done,” we request, says Vincent, “that ourselves and others might have compliance of will with the will of God, so as thankfully to accept merciful providences, and patiently submit unto afflictive providences” (cf. Luke 1:38; Acts 21:14; Matt. 26:39, 42; Luke 22:42; Heb. 5:7–8; 2 Cor. 12:8–9; Matt. 8:2). “Thy will be done” is a prayer of submission or a prayer of dedication. It prays that God will accomplish his purposes, and that we will accept his providences, and also that we will obey his precepts. Endnotes [1] Johannes G. Vos, The Westminster Larger Catechism: A Commentary (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R, 2002) 233. [2] Thomas Vincent, The Shorter Catechism Explained from Scripture (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1980) 87.

And Jerusalem, Your city, return in mercy, and dwell therein as You have spoken; rebuild it soon in our days as an everlasting building, and speedily set up therein the throne of David. Blessed art thou, O LORD, who rebuilds Jerusalem (Amidah 14). Speedily cause the offspring of David, Your servant, to flourish, and lift up his glory by Your divine help because we wait for Your salvation all the day. Blessed art thou, O LORD, who causes the strength of salvation (Yeshua) to flourish (Amidah 15). Exalted and hallowed be God’s great name in the world that he created according to his will. May he establish his kingdom, and may his salvation blossom and his Anointed one be near … speedily and soon (Kaddish).[1]

The kingdom of God is not simply God’s eternal, universal reign over the world but his redemptive reign in the person of Jesus Christ, who, as the only mediator between God and man, exercises the offices of prophet, priest, and king. The nature of the messianic kingdom is not geopolitical or earthly, and it is not confined to the Jews but includes all nations. The kingdom of God is spiritual and heavenly; present and future; already and not yet. To pray for the coming of the kingdom suggests that it has not yet fully come. The petition—“Thy kingdom come”—has in view the as yet incomplete nature of the kingdom. The second petition of the Lord’s Prayer is a cry for the consummation of the kingdom like the prayer of the primitive church: “Come, Lord”; “Maranatha” (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:22; Revelation 22:20). Until the consummation, the kingdom of God will grow and advance throughout the world. “Thy kingdom come” is an eschatological prayer for the consummation of the kingdom, the return of Jesus Christ. But it is also a missionary prayer for the advancement of the kingdom through the spread of the gospel. “Thy kingdom come” prays for the reign of Christ, the growth of the kingdom, the salvation of the lost, the subjection of Christ’s enemies, the destruction of Satan’s kingdom, the return of Christ, and the consummation of his kingdom at the end of the age. All of these ideas are included in the simple petition: “Thy kingdom come!” Endnotes [1] See C. W. Dugmore, The Influence of the Synagogue Upon Divine Office (London: Faith Press, 1964). Though a bit dated, this book is still a helpful resource on the Jewish roots of Christian worship. More recent scholarship tends to be skeptical with regard to what we know about synagogue worship in the first century.

we pray that God would enable us and others to glorify him in all that whereby he maketh himself known, and that he would dispose all things to his own glory” (SC 101).

That’s what we pray in the first petition. In our next post, we will look at the second petition of the Lord’s Prayer. Endnotes [1] Hughes Oliphant Old, Themes and Variations for a Christian Doxology: Some Thoughts on the Theology of Worship (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1992) 23.

At that time people began to call upon the name of the LORD (Gen. 4:26b). [Abraham] built an altar to the LORD and called upon the name of the LORD (Gen. 12:8b). You call upon the name of your god, and I will call upon the name of the LORD, and the God who answers by fire, he is God (1 Kings 18:24a). Oh give thanks to the LORD; call upon his name; make known his deeds among the peoples! (Psalm 105:1) The LORD is near to all who call on him, to all who call on him in truth (Psalm 145:18). For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Rom. 10:12–13).

Prayer begins with an invocation. An invocation names the God to whom the prayer is addressed, and it claims God as our God.

O LORD, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth! (Psalm 8:1a) Bless the LORD, O my soul! O LORD my God, you are very great! (Psalm 104:1a) Praise the LORD! Praise, O servants of the LORD, praise the name of the LORD! Blessed be the name of the LORD from this time forth and forevermore! From the rising of the sun to its setting, the name of the LORD is to be praised! (Psalm 113:1–3) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places (Eph. 1:3). At that time Jesus declared, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth…” (Matt. 11:25a).

Jesus often invoked God as Father (Abba, Pater), which is a short nickname children had for their fathers (cf. John 17.1, 11, 25; Mk. 14.36). According to the New Testament scholar Joachim Jeremias,

Abba was an everyday word, a homely family-word, a secular word, the tender address of the child to its father: ‘Dear father.’ No Jew would have dared to address God in this manner. Jesus did it always, in all his prayers which are handed down to us…. Jesus spoke with God as a child speaks with his father, simply intimately, securely, childlike in manner.[2]

Jesus invoked God as Father and teaches us to follow his example. This implies intimacy and affection for God. Prayer is an “intimate conversation,” says Calvin (familiare colloquium).[3] The point is our prayers are being made from within the intimate fellowship of the household of God. God is our Father by adoption and regeneration. Moreover, it is through faith in Christ that we become his children (cf. Eph. 1.5; Jn. 1.12–13; Gal. 3.26). Thus, the Lord’s Prayer is for believers only. Only believers can call God “Father.” Faith is the foundation and necessary condition of prayer (Heb. 11.6; Gal. 4.4–6; Rom. 8.15). We can invoke God as our Father only in virtue of our faith-union to Christ. To invoke God as our Father is to pray in the name of Christ. Calvin said,

Since we call God our Father, it is certain that we understand beneath it the name of Christ also. Certainly, as there is no man in the world worthy to introduce himself to God and appear in his sight, this good heavenly Father … has given us his Son Jesus to be our mediator and advocate toward him, by whose leading we may boldly approach God, having good confidence that, thanks to this intercessor, nothing which we will ask in his name shall be denied us, since the Father cannot refuse him anything.[4]

In prayer, we approach God as children approach their father, with a childlike trust, with confidence in his fatherly goodness, with confident faith and boldness.

What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent; or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” (Luke 11:11–3)

As Martin Luther remarked,

God lovingly invites us, in this little preface, truly to believe in him, that he is our true Father, and that we are truly his children, so that full of confidence we may more boldly call upon his name, even as we see children with a kind of confidence ask anything of their parents.[5]

Likewise, in answer to the question, “Why is God called our Father, rather than some other name,” Calvin writes,

Since it is essential that our consciences have a steadfast assurance, when we pray, our God gives himself a name, which suggests only gentleness and kindness, in order to take away from us all doubt and anxiety, and to give us boldness in coming to him personally. Shall we then dare to go to God familiarly, as a child to his father? Yes, in fact with greater assurance of obtaining what we ask. For if we, being evil, cannot refuse our children bread and meat, when they ask, how much less will our heavenly Father, who is not only good, but sovereign goodness itself?[6]

In like manner, the Heidelberg Catechism says that Christ commanded us to address God as our Father so that

at the very beginning of our prayer, he may awaken in us the childlike reverence and trust toward God which should be the motivation of our prayer, which is that God has become our Father through Christ and will much less deny us what we ask him in faith than our human fathers will refuse us earthly things (HC 120).

The first part of the invocation—“Our Father”—emphasizes God’s paternal goodness; the second part—“in heaven”—emphasizes his transcendent majesty. The first part evokes intimacy and confidence; the second part, reverent fear. The transcendence of God does not make intimacy impossible. Wonderment and intimacy are combined in prayer.[7] In prayer, we should have a heavenward disposition and direction. Jesus lifted up his eyes toward heaven in prayer.

And taking the five loaves and the two fish he looked up to heaven and said a blessing and broke the loaves and gave them to the disciples to set before the people. And he divided the two fish among them all (Mar 6:41a). And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me (John 11:41b). When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you” (John 17:1). To you I lift up my eyes, O you who are enthroned in the heavens! Behold, as the eyes of servants look to the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maidservant to the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look to the LORD our God, till he has mercy upon us (Psalm 123:1–2).

When we address the LORD as God in heaven, it is the same as if we were calling him exalted, mighty and incomprehensible, so that

when we call upon him, we may learn to lift up our thoughts on high, and not to have any carnal or earthly thoughts of him, not to measure him by our apprehension, nor to subject him to our will, but to adore his glorious Majesty in humility. It teaches us also to have more reliance on him, since he is Governor and Master of all.[8]

So that’s the significance of the invocation in the Lord’s Prayer, “Our Father in heaven.” In our next post, we will look at the first petition. Endnotes [1] Some Greek manuscripts do not contain the doxology, but for reasons which we will explain later, we think it should be included in the Lord’s Prayer. [2] Joachim Jeremias, The Lord’s Prayer (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1964) 19–20. [3] John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, tr. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960) 1:2:1. [4] John Calvin, Instruction in Faith (1537), ed. and tr. Paul T. Fuhrmann (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992) 59. [5] Martin Luther, Luther’s Small Catechism (Philadelphia, PA: Lutheran Publication Society, 1893) 275. [6] From Calvin’s 1545 Catechism (260 and 261); see James T. Dennison Jr., ed. Reformed Confessions of the 16th and 17th Centuries in English Translation: Volume II, 1552-1566 (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010). [7] Hughes Oliphant Old, Praying with the Bible (Philadelphia, PA: Geneva Press, 1980) 23. [8] Calvin’s Catechism (1545), 265, in Dennison (2010).

And do not pray like the hypocrites, but as the Lord commanded in his gospel, pray in this manner: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come; your will be done, as in heaven, so also on earth. Give us today our bread for the day. And forgive us our debt, as we also forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one, for yours is the power and the glory forever. Pray in this manner three times a day (Didache 8:2–3).

The Lord’s Prayer played a central role in the worship of the early church, both corporate worship on the Lord’s Day and daily private worship. The Lord’s Prayer also played an important role in Reformed worship. Both the Larger and Shorter Catechisms contain an exposition of the Lord’s Prayer. The Lord’s Prayer is particularly useful, they state, as “the special rule of direction” that Jesus taught his disciples “to direct us in the duty of prayer” (LC 186; SC 99). In the Gospels, Jesus teaches us how to pray both by instruction and by example. Luke says that when Jesus had finished praying in a certain place, one of his disciples said to him, “Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples” (Luke 11:1). To this, Jesus responded by giving the disciples the Lord’s Prayer. Thus, the Lord’s Prayer is a prayer that teaches us how to pray (cf. Luke 11:1–4). In the Sermon on the Mount, the Lord’s Prayer is surrounded by instructions concerning two auxiliary disciplines to prayer: almsgiving and fasting (Matt. 6:1–18). Pious Jews gave alms when they went to the Temple or to the synagogue to pray (cf. Acts 3:1–3; 10:1–4). Fasting was often used as an aid to prayer (Luke 2:36–37; 18:10–12; Acts 13:1–3; 14:23). Immediately before he teaches the disciples the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus gave them two warnings about prayer. First, do not be like the hypocrites (Matt. 6:5–6).

And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

That is, do not make a show of your prayers. Second, do not be like the Gentiles (Matt. 6:7–8).

And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

That is, do not try to impress God by heaping up empty phrases, “for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.” After these two warnings, Jesus gives the Lord’s Prayer, which may be used as either a prayer form or a prayer guide (cf. LC 186, 187). As a prayer form, it is read or recited from memory. Notice that in Luke’s account, Jesus says, “pray these words” (Luke 11:2). As a prayer guide, it is used as a model for making our own prayers. In Matthew’s account, Jesus says, “pray this way” (Matt. 6:9). It is appropriate to use the Lord’s Prayer (both as a form and as a guide) in public worship, family worship and private worship. The Didache instructs Christians to pray the Lord’s Prayer three times a day:

And do not pray like the hypocrites, but as the Lord commanded in his gospel, pray in this manner: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name…. Pray in this manner three times a day (8:2–3).

The first step in learning how to pray is using the biblical forms of prayer such as the Lord’s Prayer or the Psalms. To get started, one may pray the Lord’s Prayer daily and or pray through the Psalms monthly or weekly. It is also helpful to memorize the Lord’s Prayer and selected Psalms for use in daily prayer. Tomorrow, we will look at the beginning of the Lord’s Prayer: the invocation.

The Latin tag lex orandi, lex credendi may be construed in two ways. The more usual way makes the rule of prayer a norm for belief: what is prayed indicates what may and must be believed. But from the grammatical point of view it is equally possible to reverse subject and predicate and so take the tag as meaning that the rule of faith is the norm for prayer: what must be believed governs what may and should be prayed. The linguistic ambiguity of the Latin tag corresponds to a material interplay which in fact takes place between worship and doctrine in Christian practice: worship influences doctrine, and doctrine worship (Wainwright, 218).

Thus, the relationship between theology and liturgy is dialectical; it is a two-way relationship. Lex orandi, lex credendi is a two-directional principle; theology and liturgy are mutually formative; they are “correlative norms” (ibid., 161). Another theologian who has weighed in on the issue is Paul Marshall. Marshall offers a stinging critique of the interpretation of lex orandi, lex credendi by Kavanagh and Fagerberg.[7] They present, says Marshall, “the liturgy as simply a given that ‘the people’ receive passively, rather than actively participating in the formation and critique of that liturgy.” To claim that there is “a one-way street, from the divinely given liturgy to the human response of believing” is to perpetuate “a view of the liturgy that is fixed, authoritarian, and hierarchical” (Moore-Keish, 65). Contrary to this interpretation, Marshall claims that Prosper “never intended to posit liturgical action as the single norm that establishes Christian believing” (ibid.). Rather, “Prosper’s overall point, arguing against semi-Pelagianism, is that believing is a gift from God, not a human achievement” (ibid.). Prosper writes,

[L]et us look at the sacred testimony of priestly intercessions which have been transmitted from the apostles and which are uniformly celebrated throughout the world and in every catholic church … so that the law [or rule or pattern] of supplicating [not the more general orandi, ‘praying’] may establish [or confirm] the law [or rule or pattern] of believing [not ‘the faith’] (Marshall, 140).

Thus, Prosper appeals to the universal liturgical practice of praying for the salvation of all people, “not because it is the only source, or even the first source, for theological reflection, but because it is a reliable source that demonstrates the broad apostolic Christian faith” (Moore-Keish, 66). Whatever Prosper may have intended by his maxim, it has provided the occasion for a modern debate over the relationship between theology (lex credendi) and liturgy (lex orandi). This debate has divided Protestants and Catholics since the time of the Reformation. The Reformers’ Catholic opponents usually conceded that, while the substance of their eucharistic theology had its foundation in scripture, there were aspects of the Mass (such as the Roman Canon) that had developed over time. Like their medieval forebears, 16^th century Catholic apologists assumed that the lex orandi should determine the lex credendi. Scripture was a source of Catholic doctrine but so were the liturgical practice of the church and testimony of the fathers. Thus the fact that many Catholic liturgical practices had no explicit scriptural warrant was not necessarily problematic for Catholic apology.[8] On the other hand, the Reformers believed that certain biblical doctrines were incompatible with various liturgical practices in the Roman church. For example, the Roman Mass—particularly the sacrificial language of the Latin canon—was hardly compatible with the doctrines of the perfection of Christ’s atonement and of justification by faith alone. Like the gift of justification, Protestants saw the Lord’s Supper as a gift (beneficium) received from God and not a sacrifice (sacrificium) offered to God. Protestant theology, therefore, inevitably led to changes in the liturgy. Hence, the Reformers believed that lex credendi could exercise control over lex orandi “when it came to forms of existing worship that needed correction” (Irwin, 16). Theology can critique worship and improve it where necessary. The Latin maxim lex orandi, lex credendi offers a helpful corrective to the common tendency in modern Protestant circles to bifurcate theology and liturgy as two independent branches of ecclesial life.[9] Theology and liturgy are, in fact, interrelated and mutually formative. True doctrine forms the foundation of true worship, and true worship is an expression of true doctrine. Theology shapes the church’s liturgy, but over time, the worship of the church will inevitably influence its theology. Both theology and liturgy must be derived from scripture alone, since it is the only infallible rule for faith and worship. Endnotes [1] See David W. Fagerberg, Theologia Prima: What is Liturgical Theology? (Chicago/Mundelein, IL: Hillenbrand Books, 2004) 39–69. [2] Martha L. Moore-Keish, Do This in Remembrance of Me: A Ritual Approach to Reformed Eucharistic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008) 12. [3] Frank C. Senn, The People’s Work: A Social History of the Liturgy (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2006) 227. [4] See Geoffrey Wainwright, Doxology, The Praise of God in Worship, Doctrine and Life: A Systematic Theology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1980) 225–26. [5] See Kevin Irwin, Liturgical Theology: A Primer (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1990) 46–47. [6] Bryan D. Spinks, Do This in Remembrance of Me: The Eucharist from the Early Church to the Present Day (London: SCM Press, 2013) xii. [7] Moore-Keish, 65. See Paul V. Marshall, “Reconsidering ‘Liturgical Theology’: Is There a Lex Orandi for All Christians?” in Studia Liturgica 25 (1995): 129–51. [8] Nicholas Thompson, Eucharistic Sacrifice and Patristic Tradition in the Theology of Martin Bucer, 1534–1546 (Leiden: Brill, 2005) 4–5. [9] Cf. Alexander Schmemann, “Liturgy and Theology,” Greek Orthodox Theological Review 17, no. 1 (1972): 86–100.

[O]n the day that is called Sunday all who live in the cities or in rural areas gather together in one place, and the memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read for as long as time allows. Then after the lector concludes, the president verbally instructs and exhorts us to imitate all these excellent things. Then all stand up together and offer prayers…. [W]hen we have concluded our prayer, bread is brought forward together with the wine and water. And the presider in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings according to his ability. The people give their consent, saying “Amen”; there is a distribution, and all share in the Eucharist. To those who are absent a portion is brought by the deacons. And those who are well-to-do and willing give as they choose, as each one so desires. The collection is then deposited with the presider who uses it on behalf of orphans, widows, those who are needy due to sickness or any other cause, prisoners, strangers who are traveling; in short, he assists all who are in need.[1]

According to Justin, a typical service of worship in Rome in the middle of the second century would have included the following elements in this order:

1. Reading of scripture – Old and New Testaments
2. Preaching – an exposition of the text(s) read
3. Prayers
4. Eucharist
5. Collection

Though this account of a typical worship service is only a brief summary, it is clear that the same four elements of worship mentioned in Acts 2:42 were included.

And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers (Acts 2:42, ESV).

The apostles’ teaching, of course, refers to the ministry of the Word—the reading and preaching of holy scripture. The word translated fellowship in this verse refers to the sharing of material goods. In other words, it refers to charitable or diaconal giving, and the distribution of material goods to those in need. Justin said that such material goods were collected and

deposited with the presider who uses it on behalf of orphans, widows, those who are needy due to sickness or any other cause, prisoners, strangers who are traveling; in short, he assists all who are in need.

The other two elements are “the breaking of bread” (which is the eucharist, the sacred meal of the church) and prayer. Thus, from Justin’s account of the worship in Rome, we see that a typical service of worship in the generation that followed the apostolic age consisted of (1) the ministry of the Word, (2) prayer, (3) the eucharist and (4) alms. Endnotes [1] Johnson, Worship in the Early Church, 1:68–69; cf. Bard Thompson, Liturgies of the Western Church (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1961) 3–9.

Take note of the astonishing nature of what Jesus promised his disciples, “If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit and so prove to be my disciples” (Jn 15:7). These words describe the privilege and power of prayer. We know that, without God’s gracious help, without the condescending and sacrificial work of Jesus Christ or the constant ministry of the Holy Spirit, we remain totally powerless to effect anything of eternal value (Jn 15:5). We are completely unable to please God or deliver ourselves from our desperate state. The world is full of those who pray and whose prayers are never answered, because they do not approach the living God through the only mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ. However, against this backdrop, the Son of God tells us with his very words that if we are among those who abide in him, we and our prayers are no longer resigned to futility or fruitlessness in life. God actually hears and faithfully answers our prayers for Jesus’ sake.

The Privilege and Power of Prayer

This promise sets the plate for what I would like us to consider, for it alerts us to this great privilege, which we should highly regard and apply ourselves to enjoying well. Many of the following thoughts are not original with me. I gratefully refer you to a lecture Dr. David Powlison gave on the topic of prayer requests titled, “Modeling Grace Through Prayer Requests.” His work has been a great catalyst for my own reflections and practice. Prayer is one of the most powerful ways we can lovingly enter into each others’ lives. By interceding for one another, we can magnify the grace and shepherding care of the the Lord Jesus Christ for his flock. And so, we ought to pray for one another on a regular basis, especially in each others’ company. Such prayer should be a normal part of Christian fellowship. However, we often “fumble” the God-given opportunities we have to invite the Holy Spirit’s transforming power into our lives. And this is not just because we resist sharing our needs with one another and prefer to hide (although that’s often true), or because we apathetically neglect to pray for each other when we become aware of one another’s needs. It’s also because the prayers we do offer up to God are often heavily, if not entirely, focused on the temporal situations in view and not on the transformation of the person in the situation, whether that be ourselves or someone else. At its core, what is a personal prayer request? It’s a statement of what we perceive to be our deepest need at that moment. My prayer requests announce to others where I sense I need God’s help. The most common prayer requests heard in churches or in small group settings tend to be situational. They have to do with health problems, work responsibilities, major decisions, and daily provision. Often our focus in prayer is that suffering be removed, or that an event would “go smoothly.” And whenever that is the case, the impression is definitely, if not expressly, made that the kingdom of God is not actually about righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit, but about healthier, wealthier lives in the here and now. That’s a dangerously deceitful message to be sending to ourselves and to others, however subtly or unintentionally sent. We know, from God’s Word, and from our own Christian experience, that the Lord’s number one agenda item is not that we all be healthy and wealthy or that our lives be free from ‘bumps in the road.’ We rightly recoil when we hear such being preached by television evangelists or “health and wealth” preachers. Times of heartache, affliction, or unexpected change can be some of the most spiritually fruitful seasons of life. And our Savior promised his disciples that they would encounter tribulation in this world (John 16:33). That is still the case. The emphasis of our prayers ought not be on avoiding that which the Lord has said is unavoidable.

A More Biblically Balanced Approach

Now, of course, there is nothing wrong with praying for change in the external situations of our lives. The Scriptures address these aspects of life as real needs and subjects of prayer in various places. After all, Jesus taught his disciples, and us, to pray, “give us this day our daily bread . . .” (Matt 6:11). James 5:13ff is a good example of how both temporal and eternal needs ought to coincide in our prayers. James writes, “Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up.” So, we have biblical warrant to pray that God heal those with various health problems and to ask others to pray about the health of our bodies. But even this passage, which is the prooftext for praying about our physical well-being, doesn’t stop there. James continues, “And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed.” So, complete healing goes beyond the merely physical. And when physical, temporary needs are appropriately the subject of our prayers, they must be held in balance with our greater, spiritual needs. But the biblical paradigm of this balance is not of two equal or symmetrical foci. As I have been learning in a Gospels & Acts course with Professor Marcus Mininger at Mid-America Reformed Seminary, there is a definite asymmetry in Jesus’ and his apostles’ ministry between what we might categorize as “Word ministries” on the one hand, and “deed ministries” on the other hand. I wish I had space to develop that assertion here. But let us suffice it to say that the clear focus of Jesus’ earthly ministry was the proclamation of the good news of the coming of the Kingdom of God. His diaconal ministry, concerned with people’s bodily needs, played a distinctively supporting role. Luke recorded for us in Acts how the apostles demonstrated the continuity of this principle of asymmetry when they said, “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (Acts 6:2–4). Even where the Church’s ongoing diaconal ministry finds its greatest defense in Scripture, it is unmistakably placed in a subservient position, as a support to the more primary ministries of the Word and of prayer.

Focusing Our Prayers on Matters of Eternal Value

Another way of identifying the distinction being made here is to contrast ministry that has an eternal impact versus ministry done to or for the body, which is temporal and will not last. Coming from a slightly different angle, the Apostle Paul teaches us to have this kind of asymmetrical approach as we work out our own salvation, writing these words to Timothy, “. . . while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come” (1 Tim. 4:8). Our intercessory prayers and our personal prayer requests ought to demonstrate this same asymmetry. If neither the Lord, nor his apostles allowed their diaconal ministries to overshadow the ministry of the Word, and if Timothy was urged not to focus his energies on bodily discipline, the effects of which are temporary, but to apply himself to the spiritual disciplines of godliness, which has everlasting value, then why do we ever pray merely for people’s health or other temporal needs? Ever? We must avoid allowing the situational concerns of life to dominate our prayers to the exclusion of those things that are of first importance to our Savior. What merely situational or temporal prayer requests tend to miss is the person and his/her need for Jesus’ transforming power in the midst of their life situation. Consider my friend Shorty, who answers my question, “How can I pray for you, Shorty?” by listing only situational needs. Now, Shorty might answer me, “Pray for my job; lay-offs are coming. Pray for my wife; she’s having migraines again. Pray for my son’s upcoming final exams; he wants to get into a good college.” Every one of these prayer requests is a situational need that surrounds Shorty. None of them addresses the needs that exist within Shorty, himself. None of them address how the kingdom of heaven comes or how God’s will is done in and through Shorty. What if God preserved Shorty’s job, removed his wife’s headaches, and granted his son the recall he needed for finals? Do these situational changes constitute the coming of the kingdom in Shorty’s life? No, they do not. For, even if God answered every one of Shorty’s situational prayers, there is no indication that Shorty, himself, would undergo transformation. And yet, sanctifying transformation is what God’s kingdom will bring as the Spirit continues making headway in our lives. Sanctifying transformation is what we need to be further enabled to obey God’s revealed will. In isolation, these situational prayers fall short of being eternal, heavenly Kingdom of God prayers. Our greatest needs do not have to do with our health, our finances, or our grades. Our greatest needs have to do with who or what we worship, our growth in Christian discipleship, our dying to sin and living to righteousness, the stretching and strengthening of our faith, our active obedience to Christ, our joy in the salvation he has freely provided us, the expansion of the Church, etc. These are the kinds of things we should be seeking in prayer, things related to the kingdom and the righteousness of God (Matt. 6:33). So, wouldn’t it make more sense for us to not just pray that God change the situations of our lives, but that, by his Spirit, and for his glory, he might change us and those we pray for in the midst of our often difficult or unwelcome earthly circumstances?

The Fruit of Transformational Prayers

Additionally, if we think more transformationally and less situationally about our lives together—if we apply the asymmetry of Jesus’ and his apostles’ ministry to our own prayers—then our prayer requests will reveal our real needs and provide others with opportunities to encourage us where we really need encouragement. That’s where the Spirit is at work, in the precise places where the kingdom is seeking to make its militant advances in our lives. And because we’re dealing with our real transformational needs, our prayers can actually usher us into the light. That is where we are most aware of the cleansing power of the blood of Jesus and the sweetness of fellowship we have by virtue of our union with Christ (1 Jn 1:7). The forgiveness, wisdom, strength, and love that Jesus Christ offers us in prayer is full and free. We do not have to hide our real needs—our struggles with sin, our temptations, our trials, our weaknesses—behind merely situational prayer requests. And that’s because the confidence available to us in the midst of our fellowship with one another is not in our own righteousness or strength or wisdom anymore. Transformational prayer has the power to bring these realities to the surface in a doxological manner and in a way that strengthens our faith. Likewise, if we begin to pray for change, not just in others’ situations, but in their minds, desires, and wills in light of their present situations, we will begin to see more and more direct answers to prayer. This is because our prayers (and therefore our expectations for what answers to prayer will look like) will be more directly aligned with the reality of how the Kingdom of God comes. Through transformationally-focused prayers, we fix our hope on the coming of the Kingdom, not according to our own imaginations, but according to the Scriptures. Is it not possible that we sometimes experience discouragement from unanswered prayers because we have asked wrongly (James 4:3)? I am convinced that praying with a focus on transformation is a more biblical way to pray according to God’s will, which goes beyond just saying, “if it be your will, Lord” as a tagline to every situational request we make.

Thinking Transformationally

Of course, in order to pray transformationally for others or make personal transformational prayer requests, you need know where and how transformation is needed. If you’re struggling to see the particulars of your own needs so that you might share them as prayer requests, consider this final suggestion. Think about all of our Savior’s exemplary characteristics and how you come up short by comparison. For example, consider confessing to a fellow believer some of the ways you are quick to anger or hold onto offense. Then request they pray that you begin to embody Jesus’ patient willingness to endure unjust suffering without complaint in light of the relationships and situations that tempt you to unrighteous anger. And we can confidently expect God to answer us, because our requests are truly concerned with his revealed will (1 Jn 5:14-15). As it relates to your prayers for others, consider the various ways their situational prayer requests might be sources of temptation for them, and pray for the kingdom’s battle of the soul highlighted by their troubling situation. For example, per my earlier illustration, instead of only praying that Shorty retains his job, I can pray that the Lord would (1) strengthen Shorty’s faith in God’s power and willingness to provide generously for Christ’s sake, (2) guard Shorty’s heart as he is tempted to be anxious, and (3) convict Shorty of the need to continue working with integrity and hope because they derive from the eternal covenant promises of God and not temporal, “at-will” contracts between men. And all the while I can praise God with Shorty for the Lord’s covenant faithfulness to care for all of Shorty’s needs, which is chiefly demonstrated by the gift of his one and only Son. I believe we will find our transformational requests being answered in some measure even as we pray, well before we see answers to any of our situational requests. And what’s more, the eternal fruitfulness of transformational prayer will glorify our Heavenly Father and prove that we are disciples of his beloved Son (Jn 15:7).