Friday, November 24, 2017


It is reported over at Kiwiblog that Mr Speaker has had second thoughts on 'his' new Parliamentary Prayer.   

It appears the Queen is now back in while Jesus remains out.

I guess I can live with that given that the prayer still acknowledges 'God'.

But Mallard should have consulted first instead of going it alone.   The backtrack just makes him look a bit of a plonker.


Noel said...

Gerald said...

"Fifty-five of the members who thought a prayer should continue to be recited considered that the wording of the current prayer should not be reconsidered (63 percent of respondents, 45 percent of all members). Another member who did not consider there should be a prayer also thought that the present wording should not be reconsidered (bringing the total to 64 percent of respondents). In all, 30 members (34 percent of respondents, 25 percent of all members) considered that the wording of the current prayer should be reconsidered. Of these, 11 had answered question one with “no”—that a prayer should not continue to be recited (13 percent of respondents, 9 percent of all members). Two members did not answer question two."

Barry and others now suggesting the Queen paramount to Jesus.
Glad I'm not a monachist nor religious.

Noel said...

45 percent is a majority?

The Veteran said...

Noel ... 63% is ... the ones who did not respond edited themselves out of the discussion.

For what it is worth and by my reckoning the Parliament comprises Christians of many different faiths; Mormons; Buddhists; Sikhs; Hindus; Confucians and a significant minority (led by the Prime Minister) who have no religious faith at all.

One can acknowledge NZL was founded on the Judeo/Christian ethic but equally one should acknowledge that contemporary society has moved on from there to the point where any reference to Jesus Christ in the Parliamentary Prayer might be seen as 'uncomfortable' to some. The word 'God' is, I think, a more appropriate compromise.

As for the Queen. We are not a republic 'yet'. She is Queen of NZL. MPs swear allegiance to her. Her inclusion in the prayer is appropriate.

Noel said...

So a Miniority of Parliamentarians opted for no change to the wording of the prayer?

David said...

For what it is worth, New Zealand is one of the least religious nations. It has a secular government, not a theocracy. There is no need for prayer in Parliament.

One can acknowledge NZL was founded on the Judeo/Christian ethic ...

For what it's worth, I keep hearing this line trotted out and it is utter bullshit. If you date the founding of New Zealand from 1840 (ignoring the maori existence) it was certainly not founded on Judeo/Christian anything. That term did not exist until the mid 20th Century, first used, I believe, by Eric Blair, then co-opted by the Religious Reich in America.

Christians many of the Europeans may well have been, but that was simply an accident of culture, ethnicity, and imperialism. And even were that so, the world has moved on a lot since then. Religion has been in decline wherever education and science has been ascendant.

Furthermore, Parliament is a workplace and no workplace should force religious observance on the employees.

For what it's worth, parliamentary prayer not only offends those of other religions or no religion, it also breaches at least two of Jesus' instructions on prayer.

1. Whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, because they love to pray while standing in synagogues and on street corners so that people can see them. Truly I say to you, they have their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you. (Matthew 6:5-6).

2. Jesus then laid out the prescribed form of prayer.

This, then, is how you should pray:

“‘Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation,[a]
but deliver us from the evil one.

Not that I'd expect anyone who professes Christianity to be bothered by the words of Jesus.

The Veteran said...

Noel ... no, a majority of the Parliamentarians who responded to the question opted for no change. You can't assign the 'no responses' to one side or the other just as you cannot assign the 20.02% who did not vote in the general election any particular Party.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

And yet another lesson in Christian theology from our resident fundamental atheist.

I wonder when he'll start delivering lessons on capitalism and incentive?

Gerald said...

Waikikumukau News said...

I believe there is a Muslim in The House; maybe prayers should be 5 times a day, that will lift the level of work.