The studious omission of Jesus’ name from otherwise overtly Christian prayers (invocation & benediction) is not actually inclusive IMO. It only highlights how American civil religion is fundamentally Christianity *without* the Lord’s name—the *opposite* of “in name only”.

Like if you invite the whole country to sing the first stanza of *Amazing Grace* as a gesture of *unity*, the lyrics have to mean nothing. Their content—grace, salvation, wretch, lost, found, non/sight—have to be evacuated of all content.

This is observation, really, not criticism. Just noting. I think there’s some virtue in a cultural form of religion, actually. But it’s properly understood as the overflow of the church’s worship into public virtue and love. One hopes that it yields justice.

But it is also worth remembering that our political shrines are not coextensive with the temples of our hearts and the worship we do on marble steps is never a substitute—though it will try to pose as such—for the internal and collective devotion of the church. That’s all.

Oh right I remembered the point I was trying to make: I think it’s more honest if ur Christian to pray in Jesus’ name and not pretend that everyone can pray with you in that. Then you’re not implicitly gathering (and coopting) all non-Xns into your prayer. You’re acknowledging

that you’re praying next to—not over or for—your non-Xn neighbours and fellow citizens, and that’s ok! Because the alternative sets up this civil religion thats just Xty w/o Jesus, which implicitly reinforces the sense of all non-Xn religions as faulty instances of the norm.

IOW I think u can have 1) a civil religion that’s Xty w/o Jesus, that purports to be *for* all but which insidiously diminishes non Xns
or
2) overt civil Christianity *over* all (the last 4yrs)
or
3) a rich pluralism that has Christians praying AS Xns *among* fellow citizens.