This was a phenomenal article. I have often tried to nail down what I thought was wrong with a lot of the “prayer meetings” and corporate prayers in my body. But this is an accurate description at times:

sounds good, means nothing, and keeps the people around you happy

I do not think that the whole model of “praying alone in a group” is wrong, but I think there is a need for some set or more consistently articulated prayers.

This is part of general criticism I am developing for modern evangelical protestantism as I read many of the articles on this site: there seems to be a lack of “quality” at times in the way churches are set up and then engaged. So often, we like to preserve a sense of dynamics and “life” in a church via improvisation and freedom. Quality is shunned as a code-word for legalism. However, I think that in may ways we have gotten away from piety and seriousness in our approach to God within these situations. I think your ideas on prayer may indicate that we have gotten away from quality in that instance as well.

9For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding;

10That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God;

11Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness;

12Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
(Colossians 1:9-12)

I wouldn’t call this liturgical, but he says that he doesn’t cease to pray this way. So while he may not be using the exact words consistently (and I doubt very much he was reading prayers he had written), this does show the necessity of continual supplication for other believers.

People get into “vain repetition” when they think they are heard for their much speaking, as Jesus said. So the attitude is of prime importance in your approach to God. When I go to God, I approach him confidently because I approach him on the basis of the blood of Jesus Christ. And I KNOW that he hears me because I ask according to his will (His Word). Remember what Jesus said in John 15:7:

“If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.”

So effective prayer, whether liturgical or otherwise, is scripturally based. The assumption that praying the same thing over and over again gets results is incorrect if it assumes the answer to prayer is a result of repetition. That does not mean that prayer should not be repetitious. Indeed some prayer should be repetitious and continual, not because God is hard of hearing, but because there is a continual need to be met or direction is being sought.

Also, I think Bryan’s critique of Protestant churches isn’t accurate. From personal experience, I would estimate that a MAJORITY of traditional Protestant churches include some amount of set prayers/readings in their services from time to time. My small little Baptist church that I grew up in did so quite frequently. The current E Free church I attend does so less frequently. Again, how is this issue any different than all of the other “personal preference vs. Biblical doctrine” issues that have caused so many denominational splits the last few centuries? I’m all for learning church history and not forgetting some traditions (as long as they are Biblical), but we need to be careful not to go to the extreme that liturgical prayers should be the primary form of prayer in the church.

Yeah, I think we really have to guard ourselves against turning prayers into incantations, as if they are magic words. I have not studied much about liturgy or the Catholic (hail Mary full of grace) type prayers, so I don’t want to come off as overly critical. But I like to talk to God in a very conversational way. I mean, how else should you talk to your Father? That doesn’t necessarily suggest irreverence at all.

However, I will agree with what Colin has said about people getting away from seriousness. There is an air of irreverence in many churches. I just don’t know whether liturgy is the cure for that ill. I think the problem is more of a reflection of a condition of the heart than anything else.

That all depends on how much of the Word is abiding in you. I’ve had times when I can pray in English for an extended period of time while being inspired by the Holy Ghost, but generally that comes as a result of prolonged meditation in the scriptures. During these times of prayer the words just role off my tongue, and I become conscious of the fact that the words are coming from my innermost being and not my natural understanding.

I don’t put emphasis on spontaneity, but I do put emphasis on the inspiration of the Spirit. Nothing compares to it. I think that is what Paul was trying to communicate when he said we should be,

“Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints.” (Ephesians 6:18)

The written, standardized prayers of the liturgy and in scripture can be prayed either meaningfully or not.*

The spontaneous prayers of protestants can be prayed either meaningfully or not.*

Sometimes an ancient written prayer actually says what your heart and mind couldn’t quite verbalize in a spontaneous prayer. What an encouragement to know that saints of old had the same struggles we do today.

Sometimes a spontaneous prayer can express one’s faith in a specific way that a written prayer has no clue about. What an encouragement to hear a friend pray for me in a way so specific to my need that I know the Spirit is leading him.

I vote we keep both forms of prayer.

*see Chris’s post above this one.

What do you mean?

I see what you’re saying. I have to agree with you on about the “so-called worship songs” not being very scriptural. That really irks me. I used to play in a worship band, and there were just some of those songs I flat refused to sing. I never voiced opposition to them, I just didn’t sing them or just skipped the really unscriptural parts. There is one our church sings that comes to mind:

“Oh, I wish I could sing like David sang…”

I’m thinking, “So what’s stopping you?” How is that worship or praise? That’s ridiculous! I could give you countless other examples, but I don’t feel like getting my dander up.

Hope your dander isn’t up yet.

I wouldn’t say this lyric is completely unscriptural. I mean Abraham was called the friend of God, and they blessing of Abraham is ours by faith. Plus Jesus called his disciples friends.

How about, “Give us clean hands…”

How can this lyric be reconciled with:

21And you, that WERE [past tense] sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet NOW [present tense] hath he reconciled

22In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:
(Colossians 1:21,22)

The problem I have with some of these so-called worship songs is that they have a “before Christ” mentality about them. Any song that sings about being unrighteous and pleas for God to make us clean, etc. fails to take into account that the power of the redemptive work of Christ. Such a song, by definition, cannot be praise or worship. What? Are we praising God because we are so unworthy and helpless? The concept of reconciliation actually does denote righteousness or friendship. I mean, did not God ever make an unrighteous creation. If not, those who are new creations have no reason or right to sing about being unclean. We need to decide whether we are washed or unclean. Being washed IS actually a reason to praise God.

As for “I am a friend of God”… I don’t think the lyrics of themselves are completely off-base (though some mention of Jesus’ statement that he is our friend IF we obey Him might be nice), but rather the emphasis or focus of the song. I, I, I. Me, Me, Me. Not really a worship song. Encouraging song, perhaps, but not fit for worship.

Let’s assume that is what the songwriter meant, when he wrote “Give Us Clean Hands.” But should we be asking God to give us clean hands because of our struggle with the flesh? And if so, is that praise? Look at Paul’s take on dealing with the flesh:

“But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway” (1 Corinthians 9:27).

Is he asking God to do something about his flesh? Nope. This is what he is saying:

2Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.

3For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.

4When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.

5Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
(Colossians 3:2-5)

Bringing the flesh under subjection to the inner man is about thinking spiritually instead of carnally or earthly (verse 20, because:

“For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace”(Romans 8:6).