I’ve often heard that the point of prayer is not to invoke a change in reality — a magic spell to cause God to make things all better — but to invoke a change in the pray-er: to clarify needs and wants, to gain inspiration of what to do toward the end being sought, to derive strength for action.
And that comes out, in the Bible, time and time again, particularly in the New Testament, where prayer without action to back it up, prayer for the sake of praying (or, worse, for being seen to be praying), is roundly condemned.
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, and one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. (James 2:14-18)
The “thoughts and prayers” of politicians in response to disasters and heartbreak — most visibly of late following mass shootings — are nice to see, but are only meaningful if they are followed up by action. Looking to have the grieving comforted? What are you doing to comfort them? Looking to prevent such things from happening again? What are you doing to stop it?
That’s not to advocate a particular legislative agenda — but, for example, the tragedy of gun deaths has been discussed and debated and lots and lots of ideas have been floated to help address it, from gun regulation to better mental health care to more mental health interventions to better study of the issue to simply coming to accept that piles of bodies are the Moloch-like sacrifice we must make to ensure our freedom. Whatever. This is to advocate grabbing onto one of those agendas, or more than one, and fight for it. Act on it, or be open about your inaction as the wisest course.
Prayer is not a “Get Out of Moral Obligation Free” card. In fact, it’s the precise opposite, because it shows an awareness of a need, and so calls on the pray-er to do something to meet it more than offer up pious thoughts.
‘Thoughts and Prayers’ Could Be Exactly What America Needs
Gandhi called prayer “the most potent instrument of action.” But will politicians follow through?
And … cue Paul Ryan, saying that it's divisive by the "secular left" to attack people who pray without acting on their prayers, because prayer "works," though it's unclear in what fashion of "working" he means.
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/359079-paul-ryan-praying-is-the-right-thing-to-do-after-mass-shootings-because-it
Yeah, I would really like for Ryan to explain what he means by "working." Because they certainly aren't "working" at preventing or stopping future attacks, that's for sure.
I think it's possible what Ryan means is that if people didn't pray, there would be many, many more shootings.
This is compounded by the fact that a politician (or a leader such as Martin Luther King Jr.) must, while perhaps having a personal faith, is also in some respect speaking on behalf of people of many different faiths (or no faith at all).
The civil religion plays into this also, and a leader (President, Speaker of the House, whatever) often speaks on behalf of the entire country.
The example that comes to mind is George W. Bush. Bush was not a Muslim, but in his statements as President he took pains to emphasize that the United States was not conducting a war on Islam, and that American Muslims were truly American.
So (if I may quote a Lutheran phrase) "what does this mean" when a U.S. politician speaks after some tragedy? In the immediate aftermath, the primary need is to comfort the victims (of all faiths or lack thereof). Perhaps in some circumstances a more personal religious statement is also in order (for example, if the President is a Muslim and a mosque were attacked). I can't quibble with the idea that action should be part of the long-term "thought and prayer," but in this case in particular, I'm not sure exactly what the action should be because there are so many variables floating around.
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/quotes/george-w-bush-addresses-muslims-in-the-aftermath-of-the-9-11-attacks
+John E. Bredehoft In these particular cases, the (visible) model is "My thoughts and prayers go out to the people affected by this horrible tragedy, but let's not talk about public policy because it's Too Soon." And then its back to business as usual.
Coming up with snap solutions to immediate major problems is rarely helpful, either, to be sure. But there are a lot of things that could be done viz mass shootings or major disasters or whatever. I would rather see someone actually taking actions that I don't agree with or don't think will help, but owning that, than using a "time for prayer" as a way to kick the can down the road.
+John Bump But there's no proof of that. In fact, countries that are more secular have less violent crimes than countries that are religious. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1101-zuckerman-violence-secularism-20151101-story.html