To pray to someone is an act of worship. Most essentially, prayer is transcendent communication with someone who does not, during the communication, share your “plane of existence.” In other words, it is an expression of fellowship with someone with whom you are in a non-empirical relationship. Let me put it another way: I don’t pray to my wife, friends, co-workers, or parents. I have fellowship with them, but this fellowship takes place in the same dimension. We pray to God not only because we believe that he exists, but because we believe that he listens from a “place” of transcendence. We believe he has the power to hear and respond to millions of people at once. It is an act of worship, not only because we believe he is transcendent, but because of the power we must ascribe to him to assume that he hears, engages, and responds. Indeed, it is the power of divinity that must facilitate such an act as prayer.
We believe that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, but they are not each other. We call this “the Trinity.” But when we pray, to whom do we pray? Do we pray to the Trinity (as an ontological unit)? I start prayers out this way all the time: “Dear God, ….” I can see the members of the Trinity looking at each other in confusion as they attempt to figure out which one I am praying to. “Ummm, I think this one is for you, Jesus,” says the Holy Spirit. “No, it is for the Father,” Jesus responds. “Not me! He just said ‘God.’ That could be any one of us. Rock, paper, scissors?”
Forgive my blasphemous humor here. But I think this illustrates an often unspoken issue for those of us who are Trinitarian. To whom do we pray?
In seminary, Dr. Jeffery Bingham, chair of theology and professor of historic theology (an Irenaeus madman), made it clear what the traditional formula was: We are to pray to the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit. Did you get that?
TO the Father
THROUGH the Son
BY the the Spirit
Christ, when asked by the disciples about how to pray, starts his prayer with, “Our Father…” (Matthew 6:9). Seems to be quite a slam dunk. We are to pray to the Father. Origen backs this up when he says that we pray to the Father alone “through Jesus” (ANF, Chapter XXXVII). As well, Christ is called the “high priest” who intercedes for us (Heb. 4:15). To whom does Christ intercede? To the Father. Therefore, we enter into the Father’s presence “in his name,” not our own – through the Son (John 15:16).
And there is nothing in the Scripture about praying to the Holy Spirit at all. In fact, the ministry of the Holy Spirit is one of empowerment (Acts 1:8) whose ministry is to point to Christ (John 16:14).
So, it seems pretty clear. We are to pray to the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit. Right? Not so fast . . .
While I think this is a fine way to think about it, I don’t think we can necessarily go wrong, pragmatically or theologically, when we pray to any member of the Trinity or to God as Trinity alone.
First, concerning Christ’s model prayer to the Father: it could be that Christ was telling us we are to pray to the Father and not to him, but we may be reading too much into the phrase “Our Father.” It may not be exclusive prayer to the first person of the Trinity, but speaking of God (including all members of the Trinity) as a “fatherly” figure. David Turner says about this passage: “One may think of 6:9-10 as indicating the person to whom prayer is addressed […] and the priorities by which prayers are formed […] This person to whom prayer is addressed is characterized as “Father,” a term inevitably colored by one’s relationship to one’s human father” (Matthew, BECNT, 184). As well, Isaiah speaks of the Messiah/Jesus as “eternal father” (Isaiah 9:6). This is not in the sense of the “first person of the Trinity” (as that would be reading too much into the text, not to mention a promotion of modalism), but in the sense that Christ is an eternal “father figure.” So I am not too comfortable reading our Trinitarian categories into the “our father” of the Lord’s prayer.
Even if we did read “our Father” as meaning the first person of the Trinity, does this exclude a belief that we can pray to Christ? Of course Christ, as our example of prayer, never prayed to himself, so praying to the Father by Christ is on par with his mission. However, once “all authority” was given to him (Matthew 8:28), did some things change? Yes, Christ did say to ask for anything in his name and the Father would do it. However, in John 14:14, he says, “If you ask anything in my name, I will do it” (emphasis mine). There, he is both the agent of representation and the agent of action.
There are other important issues to consider. We are told to call upon the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13). In the context, it is Christ upon whom we call. It is his reputation and his activity that we beseech. Stephen clearly prays to Jesus upon his death when he says, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts 7:59). In Revelation 22:20, we have the great “Maranatha!” which means, “Come, Lord Jesus!” (see also Acts 1:24).
We also have our relationship with Jesus to consider. Being a high priest whom we are to love and find encouragement and support from, it is hard to imagine that we don’t foster this relationship through conversation. After all, how can we have a “friend” (John 3:29; John 15:15) to whom we have never directly spoken? I think the Scriptures testify to a relationship with all three members of the Trinity, including the Holy Spirit, with whom we have “fellowship” (2 Corinthians 13:14; Philippians 2:1).
So while I do find that most of the prayer in the New Testament seems to be directed toward the Father, and I like the theological astuteness of the whole “to the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit” (it just sounds like you know what you are talking about!), I don’t think we should be too theologically legalistic about this. We should think deeply about these things and be intentional in our relationship with God, but this intentionality should not cause us too much anxiety as God – our Trinitarian God – loves us deeply and understands the difficulties involved. When you worship, worship the Trinity. Worship the Father. Worship the Son. Worship the Holy Spirit. When you pray, follow the same pattern.
121 replies to "To Whom Do We Pray? The Father, Son, or Holy Spirit?"
Well then CMP you go pray to God the Holy Spirit, in the name of the Father through the power of Jesus as we will call it a day, eh?
@Michael: Is just me, or this not a kinda “fundamentalist” mind-set with several? I know I am a “Churchman” and theolog type, but surely we must be pressed by sound theology, as we approach the words of Christ!
Alex, I will just have fellowship with them all the best I can. And if I say “thank you Jesus” I won’t feel theologically dirty.
Just as an aside, this post will sadly serve as an example how Christians can make a controversy out of anything and put our worst foot forward as a spectical for the world ,who already thinks theology is divisive, to see.
The example of the Ark of the Covenant being carried improperly is qualitatively different from the example of Stephen praying to Jesus. In one case, the action was punished severely and there can be no question of God’s disapproval. In the other case, no such disapproval is seen, and various early Christians keep on doing it with no correction.
“Just as an aside, this post will sadly serve as an example how Christians can make a controversy out of anything and put our worst foot forward as a spectical for the world ,who already thinks theology is divisive, to see.”
I thought that P and P was supposed to be a place where we could discuss different issues and different views on things. Always has been before. So why when someone disagrees with you on an issue here now are we accused of creating controversy and making a spectacle for the world to watch? There have been many and many a disagreement on issues here in the past. Many and many a time when tempers have flared and things have gotten really hot and even quite nasty. So I am not sure why a disagreement and discussion on it here rates this kind of reaction from you Michael. This place has never been united on our understanding of theology or doctrine.
Cheryl, it is just the battles that people choose to fight and the way they choose to fight them. This will be an ever going struggle with the Internet and a necessary evil.
Michael,
This may not have been an issue that you saw as a battle worth “fighting.” But obviously, for several others that have commented here it is an issue that they felt well worth discussing.
And having the terms that are obviously not meant to be flattering of “legalism” and “fundamentalist” thrown at a person is not at all likely to help matters any. When a person is offering what they believe to be valid concerns in a conversation, getting hit with such is not very likely to improve the tone of the conversation much. Some times it almost seems that to call a person a “fundamentalist” is the worst possible name that could ever be leveled against a fellow Christian.
I certainly hope I was not the cause of the ‘controversy’ for simply trying to present an alternate point of view. I tried to be as graceful in my answers to you as I could. It is a valid question that people have about prayer because they don’t always understand why Jesus asked to us pray the way He did., or if they are doing it ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. .
However, I do agree with Cheryl in the respect that perhaps you are monitoring this thread more closely than you usually do, but those of us who comment here regularly can sure tell you that this was a pretty mild disagreement, other than some unnecessary name calling, (which I abhor) but this is mild in comparison to what has been said in comments elsewhere on this site.
Well, I wish I had more time to keep a closer eye on things but I don’t. However, if this is what takes place over minor issues such as this (and I reserve the right to say, in the context of this blog to define this as minor—someone has to draw some lines), I fear what the world is seeming here. Fortunately, 90 percent of people don’t even look at the first comment.
And I don’t remember calling anyone a legalist. Well, no one here.
Well, maybe it is a minor issue here. But to quote you in your OP, “Forgive my blasphemous humor here. But I think that this illustrates an often unspoken issue for those of us who are Trinitarian. Who do we pray to?”
You believed it to be an issue for people. So I would think varying opinions would be expected.
Well, the best way is always self-control in all of what we say, no matter who we are. No one person can police that 100%, nor should they have to on a website frequented primarily by Christians. But sadly that’s the sad reality of things nowadays that folks say things on blogs in a way they would never dream of speaking to others in a local church.
Okay Cheryl. I will step out though. Again, I am just glad not too many people read comments.
My use of the word “fundamentalist” was in theological disagreement. I know plenty of people who use the word as a badge of honor, and biblical correctness. I sometimes call some of my own positions as “biblicist”, but I am always a historic “Churchman”, and theologically Reformational & Reformed. And as an Anglican I also believe in using the word “catholic”, in theology and the Bible. But not Roman Catholic, or even Anglo-Catholic. And we indeed need to rehabilitate the word “Evangelical”, and take it back from the “emergents”! I hope I can get an Amen here! 😉
Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours (1 Corinthians 1:2).
Since to “call upon” mean to pray to doesn’t this passage teach that a Christian is one that prays to the Lord Jesus?
Fr. Robert,
I think the very word fundamentalist has come to be more of a personal insult nowadays. It seems to refer now to folks who don’t believe in wearing their hair in braids or any of those other minor cultural things, whereas when I was growing up it just meant the believing the major essentials as spelled out in the Bible. I might be an incredible dinosaur but I still believe in that.
I just think the word has been unfortunately redefined now to mean something entirely different, like the word ‘pharisee’ used to be thrown around indiscriminately, and in some circles still is.
Unfortunate for us all.
Oh, and BTW,Fr. Robert thought you might be interested in this definition from the Credo House’s own website (aka as Parchment and Pen)
CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISM
December 31st, 2011
“Originally fundamentalism referred to the early 20th century movement that opposed liberalism and took a decisive stand for the essentials or “fundamentals” of the Christian faith (e.g. virgin birth, miracles, deity of Christ, etc.). Later the term “fundamentalism” became associated with Christian legalism and radical conservatism. In this sense, it has become a derogatory term with implications of anti-intellectualism. Also, in this later sense, it is to be distinguished from Evangelicalism.”
mbaker: Yes, I had a “fundamentalist” greatmother, of the PB type (Plymouth Brethren) growing up in Dublin, Ireland. And I am familar with the history and life of the American Presbyterian John Gresham Machen, who was involved in the great Modernist-Fundamentalist debate. So I really do see the best of the so-called Fundamentalist ideas. But indeed sadly, this has degenerated into using “fundamentalism” in the worst light.
This really makes me think about a hypothetical my wife and I talked about because my son (6 years old) usually starts his prayers with “dear Jesus.” The hypothetical goes like this : a boy has just learned that Jesus came down to earth, took human form, and died for the sins of the elect (definite atonement plug). In excitement, the boy gets down on his knees and cries out ” Dear Jesus, will you please forgive me of my sins! I want to live for you everyday now and forever!” And then dies tragically and immediately after. We all think he is covered, right? But what if the prayer had started out, “Dear Holy Spirit……and continued.?
My friend Skaggers:
I have steered away from commenting largely on this topic mostly because CMP does a great job I believe of expressing the theological topic, thoughts, and intent.
As all of us in common marvel at the love of God toward us, as well as His love displayed in Trinity. It would only serve the limited scope of humanity to stretch our theology to have an answer for every hypothetical, every mystery. Friend this would be a case in missing the point.
Some have expressed their opinion, some have asked questions. Thank you for yours. It seems evident that God’s grace is enough on this topic, and we know He knows and looks at our hearts. It might seem like I’m avoiding giving you an answer or opinion and maybe I am. I’d rather see a heart that humbly says I Don’t Know sometimes rather than A+B must equal C.
@Marc Taylor: Great verse mate, (1 Cor. 1:2)! Once again, this kinda shuts down this whole question & issue! Certainly we can pray to God-triune, each member, but always Christ Jesus, the Son of the Father, eternally. And I am again quite amazed how some simply miss the whole Mediatoral work of Christ here! Only God can mediate God, and Christ did this before and after the Incarnation, as we can see that He is “the image of the invisible God.” (Col. 1:15, see also Heb. 1:2-3; and verse 8) Again, this is really part of the whole mystery of God-triune: The Divine Triad!
Adam,
I agree with you completely! God’s grace does cover us. And really, i thought that this matter was much more non-essential than I guessed. (by the comments i see) That is is why it was just a hypothetical. But there are many church’s that so often say to pray some specific formula to get saved. We would reject God without that grace bestowed upon our hearts, no matter what was “prayed.” You may not have known it, but my wife and I both had the same conclusion as you, would rather say I don’t know to the question than to actually answer.
Cheryl: It seems to me that while Jesus did not command the disciples to pray directly to him, he expected that they would (John 14:14).
CMP: Just a point to my mind, but one of the greatest needs of the historic and catholic church, is the like-minded People of God (union, not uniformity), in doctrine & theology. We see this simply in Jude 1:3, but we also note verse four: “For admission has been secretly gained by some who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly persons who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.” (I am not pointing this at anybody here, just making at point, that in the Church, we will always have those who “pervert” the grace of God, and also deny Christ.)
The Ecumenical Councils, are helpful and even needed in this Christian Union of believers, sadly however they are neglected today by many Evangelical Christians. Here of course I speak mainly of the Nicene “homoousios”. For Christ is ‘very God’. In the Anglican Communion, there are the Three Creeds of close use and belief “believed: for they maybe proved most certain warrants of holy Scripture.” These are the Nicene Creed, the Athanasius Creed, and the Apostles Creed. But sadly too, these today are certainly not closely held, nor even believed by many so-called Anglicans. The point is, the Church is living in the time of great Apostasy! As the NT itself said would come, and even somewhat began in the Apostles time.
Michael,
I am amazed at the responses to this post. Who would have thought it would generate so much heat…?
Yesterday, I almost joined the conversation with similar amazement but decided to hold off. Now, I must express my amazement.
In emergency situations we simply call out to our Triune God, usually saying something like, “Lord Jesus, save me!” This is what Stephen did. I find it hard to condemn this kind of heart-felt prayer just because it does not fit into the sometimes self-assumed formulation of the Lord’s prayer with the disciples.
I wonder if all those who are against praying to Jesus, have ever thanked him for what he did for them?
Here is a wonderful quote from Dr. Jack Hyles’ excellent book, EXPLORING PRAYER WITH JACK HYLES . . .
I remember one night years ago when Dr. John R. Rice and I were at a Bible conference together. Before he preached, he prayed something like this, “Oh, Father, breathe on me. Lord Jesus, help me to preach tonight. Holy Spirit, give me power.”
After the service a young preacher came to Dr. Rice and said, “You made a serious mistake while you prayed to God the Father, then you prayed to Jesus, then you prayed to the Holy Spirit.” He continued, “The proper procedure is to pray to the Father through the Son in the Spirit.”
Dr. Rice looked at him with a sheepish grin and replied, “Son, I’ve been in the family long enough until I know all of Them personally. I just talk to whichever One I need to talk to at the time.” The old giant patted the young man on the shoulder and went his way.
Jeff Ayers: I love your contribution!
One’s theology must be consistent through the ages (unless you are a hyperdispensationalist):
Can you honestly support the proposition of “Praying to the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit” from the Old Testament scriptures?
Where do we find the Patriarchs praying “THROUGH the Son”?
Where do we find the Prophets praying “BY (or IN) the Spirit”?
If the Holy Spirit is God, and He is, then why should we be prohibited from praying TO OUR GOD, if the Scriptures make no such prohibition?
Before we get on our theological high horse, let’s make sure we can ride it through the OT.
I just prayed to God the father, his son Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit……..and I liked it!!!! What God would not like is for me to NOT pray to him. IMHO
Wow this post really took off with comments!
Can anyone point those of us, who tend to agree with CMP’s perspective, toward several published, recognized, scholarly resources in which it is argued thoroughly and exegetically that it is never appropriate for modern day Christians to pray to Jesus or the Holy Spirit? Thanks!
Jack Hyles as a source for sound theology? Ho ho ho this must be a bit of sarcasm.
The NT gives a general approach to prayer, since the Father is the first person, the regal and the “monarchy” of the Godhead. But since the Trinity of God is each member of the Godhead, the unity of the Substance of the One God, safeguarded in the co-equality of the triune Persons, each person is God, and though distinct, the three persons cannot be divided from another in being or in operation. So we can approach each Person in the spirit of worship, need and adoration, here is “spirit and truth”! And also here is that place of mystery, and only here too do we approach in faith! – 2 Cor. 13:14 / Eph. 2:18
Love that story of the American Baptist Dr. John R. Rice! I remember Sword and the Trowel, even in the UK (years ago).
*The Sword and the Trowel?
Btw, there is both biblical theology and systematic theology. We really need them both, and the historical Church is always involved here, as “the pillar and ground (mainstay) of the truth.” (1 Tim. 3:15) We simply cannot approach the Bible without the Church, to some degree. Again, this is something many so-called Evangelical Christians lack!
Hello Tyler,
I haven’t found anything so far in terms of scholarly sources forbidding prayer to the Lord Jesus or the Holy Spirit.
In the EDNT under kurios are listed passages where kurios is used with an * showing it is debatable if it is in reference to the Father or the Lord Jesus. Incredibly the kurios in Acts 1:24 was not applied to the Lord Jesus nor was it even debatable.
(Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament 2:330, kurios – J.A. Fitzmeyer).
The evidence that this prayer is to Christ (despite many that say it is uncertain or that it probably does) is more than abundant.
I’ll see what else I can dig up.
John 14:14 has been stated, but it simply like 1 Cor.1:2 must be stated again! I wonder sometimes how many have called (and will call) upon the name of the Lord Jesus during death & dying! (Acts 7:59) Part of my work at present right now, is as a hospital chaplain.
Thought this was one one of the best answers I’ve seen so far regarding this subject on both sides:
http://carm.org/questions/about-doctrine/who-do-we-pray-father-son-or-holy-spirit?
Perhaps western Christianity overemphasizes the separateness of the members of the Trinity. We unconsciously think of God like a pie chart divided into 3 non-overlapping wedges – each wedge is a component of the whole. But God is a single being, so when I speak to the Father, not only are Jesus and the Holy Spirit hearing what I’m saying, but each of them is automatically and implicitly being spoken to at the same time. I don’t think it is possible to pray to one of them only.
I agree with CMP’s comments about the Messiah being referred to as “Eternal Father” in Isaiah 9:6. This is not an allusion to the deity of the Messiah but to his fatherly function towards his people (cf. Mat.23:37, Isaiah 22:21). But I hesitate to regard ‘Our Father’ in the Lord’s prayer as not being a specific reference to God the Father since Jesus’ first listeners could not have been expected to have understood anything different.
I hesitate to regard John 16:23 as the absolute final definitive word on the subject of who we should pray to. Jesus gave several seemingly absolute commands about oaths, divorce, forgiveness, etc. which in parallel passages contain some conditions/exceptions.
Paul’s prayer at the end of 1 Cor.16 (“Maranatha!”) is addressed to Jesus, and its Aramaic form suggests it probably predates Paul’s letter. Also John prayed to Jesus in Rev.22:20. See also Rev.5:9-10.
Whatever our opinion, praise God for wanting us and allowing us to talk to him!
Trinity has always confused me. Whenever I think I get it, I get confused. “To Whom we should pray” is one of those areas where I am consistently inconsistent.
See, I agree that when we pray we are essentially praying “to the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit”. I actually do think that “Our Father” in the Lord’s prayer speaks to the Father, instead of “speaking of God (including all members of the Trinity) as a ‘fatherly’ figure”. Christ on earth taught that “I and the Father are one”, but he was also always mindful of bringing attention (and glory) to the Father alone.
That’s why when I pray, I am frequently mindful (but not always) that I ought to pray to the Father and through the Son.
On the other hand, I am also uncomfortable with any legalistic rule that we should always pray “to the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit” — It just sounds a tad too tritheistic to me. I figure, if our God is one, despite that He is triune, then we should be able to pray to God in general, or any 1, 2 or 3 of the three. 🙂
@Francis: This is the whole point to looking at the Creedal history of the Trinity of God, GOD is always ONE in His triune being! And herein is “mystery”! But, we also should note too that GOD in history, is “Economically” seen, i.e. from the management of the “Covenant” in time. Noting biblically and theologically, that God moves His truine redemption about as HE sees fit! So we can approach God in His Oneness, but must surely also in the grand mystery of His triune-Person (Matt. 28:19)…”in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
Note that “Name”…Singular!
I actually did read all the posts, and all I have to add is that I am looking forward to the next P&P post, as I greatly appreciate the ministry of this blog, even if things sometimes get a bit “heated.”
@Alex #33: My My that was good Christian edification.
Do you feel better now that you have attempted to trash a man (Dr. Jack Hyles) who excelled in all areas of the Christian life.
BTW- You criticize better than you read. The story was about the “theology” of Dr. John Rice.
94 comments and the best you could come up with is pejoratives against a deceased man of God?
Shame on you.
@Fr. Robert #34 and #35
Dr. John R. Rice started the Sword of the Lord
http://www.swordofthelord.com/history.php
Spurgeon’s periodical was the Sword and the Trowel — http://www.spurgeon.org/sw&tr.htm
BTW – is Fr. short for friar? Like Friar Tuck?
@Jeff Ayers: Thanks, yes my memory is old like me! 😉 (I am 62, 3 this year.. late Oct.)
Fr. is short for “Father”, I am an Anglican priest/presbyter, though I am semi-retired now, and work mostly as a hospital chaplain. But I love to guest preach, mostly Lutheran and Presbyterian, with the latter I am FV (Federal Vision friendly). For what its worth now, I hold both the D.Phil., & Th.D. (I did my former on Luther’s Ontology of the Cross, and the latter on Roman’s studies, and Rom. 7)
Good post CMP.
Millard Erickson offers some interesting thoughts on this subject in Who’s Tampering with the Trinity?: An Assessment of the Subordination Debate (Kregel, 2009). For example, while critiquing a particular “Father-only” model of prayer, he writes regarding the Lord’s prayer in Matt. 6:
http://www.spiritualperspectives.org/articles/documents/praytojesus.html
Here the case is made against praying to the Lord Jesus. I don’t agree with what is written but I just wanted to post this so at least we can see how those who are opposed to praying to Christ defend their position.
Oh those Latin and Logic arguments can have their place, but one revealed Text from Holy & Sacred Scripture, slays eveything! 😉