Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...
video production in Manassas and Prince William County

The Tea Party Prayer

By Greg L | 21 July 2010 | Manassas City | 28 Comments

This was the invocation given at Tuesday’s meeting of the Manassas Tea Party.  A finer display of the heart and soul of the Tea Party movement may never before been delivered so well, in my opinion…

First of all God, we thank You for the myriad of blessings and favor our nation has enjoyed for so long. Even today, Lord, we sit under the shower of the residue of Your benefits. And though our nation has turned away from You, Lord, we remain the beneficiaries of the seeds sown by previous generations. We are not worthy, God. But we are grateful.

Your Word tells us that, first of all, we are to pray for our leaders and for all of those in authority over us. So, we now, in faith, ask your blessings upon them. And we say “in faith,” oh God, because we can do this only as an act of obedience. It is not a prayer that flows easily from our hearts. We are weary as watchmen on the walls, and tired of the fight. Those whom we battle are arrayed with many weapons. They utilize numerous tools and so many of their hearts appear to be filled with wicked machinations.

This is only what we see, Lord. But You sit high above the fray, and only You know the true heart of every man and woman. So we relinquish our grip on what we think and what we want to think, and ask that you grant us to see with Your eyes, and not our own, clouded ones.

O Lord, consider the man who occupies the Oval Office. Enlighten his eyes that his efforts would be right, and so that the enemy of his soul will not prevail against him. Shine Your divine light upon his heart. Pierce, point out and disclose to him what he must see, what he needs to see. May Your divine light travel through his eyes and enter his heart to bring about the kind of divine revelation that produces a genuine change of heart, for the good.

Many of our representatives in Congress also, Lord, seem to be grabbing for the kind of power that is only Yours. Our court system too is in disarray. Judges at every level abandon our Constitution and the Judeo-Christian ethic. They foolishly seek, oh God, to forge a new-age, humanistic, socialistic utopia. We ask that You deliver them from this stupidity.

Lord of mercy, focus Your gaze upon all of our leaders. Awaken their consciences. May your Holy Spirit move in concert with the Word of God to separate them from the foolish ideas they entertain. God replace their desire to serve themselves and to build their own kingdoms with a new, bold, internal desire to do what is right.

And Lord, lift the veil of deception covering the eyes of so many of our countrymen. We seem surrounded by the deceived, the apathetic, and those who would rather hide from the truth than face up to it. Give them fresh light, Lord, courage where courage is needed, and the fear of a Holy God to compel them into action.

We pray as well, Lord, for our media. They, too, seem trapped in their own ideological prisons. Shake them Lord. Shake them loose from their chains and set them free.

Lord, we Tea Partiers find ourselves to be the targets of our foes. They try hard to provoke us to an undignified word or act. Guard us Lord, not so much from the assault, but from our own potential reaction. Help us to keep our eyes set on the end prize, not the immediate gratification of lashing out or reacting in some unfortunate way.

Finally, Lord, and perhaps of greatest importance. Search our own hearts. Probe them for dark, hidden pockets of resistance to You, probe for cavities housing secret sins, hatred, ungodly anger. Root them out of us so that we might know the truest of liberties.

We bring these petitions to You with humble, grateful hearts. In Your name we pray. Amen.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

28 Comments

  1. legal2 said on 21 Jul 2010 at 7:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    It was a privilege to be among fellow patriots!

  2. legal2 said on 21 Jul 2010 at 7:49 pm:
    Flag comment

    PS I was hoping to get a copy of the Invocation - thanks for sharing it!

  3. FED UP said on 21 Jul 2010 at 8:07 pm:
    Flag comment

    AWESOME!! I hope to make the next meeting!

  4. NoVA Scout said on 22 Jul 2010 at 6:10 am:
    Flag comment

    That sure is a long invocation. If I gave one of those at one of my church meetings, the next item of business would be adjournment.

  5. bro said on 22 Jul 2010 at 7:50 am:
    Flag comment

    I thought that this was a political blog, bro.

  6. bro said on 22 Jul 2010 at 7:54 am:
    Flag comment

    and @Legal2 Being among Christians doesn’t mean you were among patriots and vice-versa, bro. Too often people like to get the two terms confused and muddled up into the same thing, fooling themselves into thinking that being a good patriot means being a good Christian.

  7. bro said on 22 Jul 2010 at 7:59 am:
    Flag comment

    But to be fair, I do acknowledge that the prayer bro wasn’t partisan with his requests. He seemed to be calling his very own people out, “O Lord, consider the man who occupies the Oval Office. Enlighten his eyes that his efforts would be right, and so that the enemy of his soul will not prevail against him.” Now I ask you, who is this enemy of Obama’s soul that he spoke of?

  8. VA_Magoo said on 22 Jul 2010 at 8:15 am:
    Flag comment

    Amen and Amen!

  9. Advocator said on 22 Jul 2010 at 10:34 am:
    Flag comment

    We should all pray for President Obama’s safety every chance we get, considering the alternative.

  10. Sanford Horn said on 22 Jul 2010 at 10:44 am:
    Flag comment

    Message to “bro:” having read the above invocation, and agreeing with NoVA Scout regarding the length, I do not see this as a decidedly Christian invocation. There is no mention of Jesus Christ, but instead repeated mention of G-d and the Lord - all fair in just about any worthy religion. And, again, length notwithstanding, it would be appropriate in a synagogue as well as a church and still delivers a strong message.

    I do agree with you, bro, that to be a good patriot one does not need be a Christian and not all Christians are patriots. I am a damn good patriot who has received much praise from a number of avid readers of this site for his columns, and as most people know, I am not a Christian.

  11. bro said on 22 Jul 2010 at 11:22 am:
    Flag comment

    Ok, well I’m going to apologize for assuming and issue my same argument using more appropriate terminology.

    Being among the God-fearing doesn’t mean you were among patriots and vice-versa. Too often people like to get the two terms confused and muddled up into the same thing, fooling themselves into thinking that being a good patriot necessarily means that you’re following the will of God.

  12. Greg L said on 22 Jul 2010 at 1:40 pm:
    Flag comment

    Why would it important to make such a distinction? Are God-fearing patriots somehow a problem in your eyes?

  13. legal2 said on 22 Jul 2010 at 3:31 pm:
    Flag comment

    Honestly, no bro of mine, I wasn’t connecting the two when I made the comment. But I must say, “being among the God-fearing” doesn’t mean I wasn’t among patriots, either. Idiot.

  14. sahdman said on 22 Jul 2010 at 8:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    We have enough demon possessed politians in Washington. Some good God trusting Patriots would do this country good.

  15. cromagnum said on 24 Jul 2010 at 8:17 am:
    Flag comment

    We need more Faith, Hope, & Charity in everything we do. Boots to the ground. Eyes to the Lord. A hand grip on Liberty.

  16. Lloyd the Idiot said on 24 Jul 2010 at 9:26 am:
    Flag comment

    An invocation is fine, but they have to keep in mind that it’s a political meeting and not a tent revival.

  17. local gop said on 24 Jul 2010 at 2:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    “We have enough demon possessed politians in Washington. Some good God trusting Patriots would do this country good.”

    oh yes, let’s further mix religion and politics…great idea…

  18. Greg L said on 24 Jul 2010 at 3:03 pm:
    Flag comment

    Heaven forbid we continue to do what the founding fathers started with this country. Are we next to hear about how we are endowed by our GOVERNMENT with certain unalienable rights?

  19. Lloyd the Idiot said on 25 Jul 2010 at 10:20 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg L, it was the founding fathers who came up with the idea of separating church and state.

  20. Greg L said on 25 Jul 2010 at 12:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    No, it was our founding fathers that came up with the idea of freedom of religion. It was our founding fathers that recognized natural rights and boldly declared that our rights are given to us by God, and not some King, potentate, or government. It was our founding fathers that firmly relied on “divine providence” in our Declaration of Independence. It was our founding fathers that openly prayed, called for days of national prayer, and clearly recognized the sinful nature of man and sought to limit government power for that precise reason.

    Our nation is no more separate from God than it is from man.

    You’re not one of those folks that seem to think the First Amendment contains the clause “separation of Church and State,” or perhaps think a private letter written to a Bible Society constitutes authoritative legislative authority, are you?

  21. local gop said on 25 Jul 2010 at 8:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    i’d rather not see the US devolve into a theocracy. that includes having politicians and presidents making decisions because ‘god told’ them to. the last president that said god spoke to him ended up jumping into a war which he didnt have an end to.

    seperation of church and state is essential to the preservation of democratic rights. if we begin to muddle the lines of seperation between religion and government, then the government will have the ability to assert more control over religion in this nation. it’s not a one way street in that only religion will control government. when you tear down the seperation, the church can control the state, or the state can control the church. seperation isnt to pick on jesus, contrary to the cultural warriors claims of assault on christmas, it’s to ensure the rights of all religions to freely and openly practice.

    it is essential that the state, and its publically elected leaders, do not pick and choose when it comes to religion. if a small town in mississippi wants to place a xmas tree on their city hall steps, that’s not wrong in my opinion. but when a sitting president says ‘god told me to go to war,’ that crosses the line.

  22. Greg L said on 25 Jul 2010 at 10:11 pm:
    Flag comment

    The U.S. didn’t devolve into a theocracy during the 150 or so years until this notion of “separation of church and state” started gaining currency among the Marxists. If it was going to happen, it would have long ago, so although I acknowledge your fears, I submit they’re baseless. No Christian is going to impose religion with the sword because to do so is quite clearly contrary to the Bible.

    Restricting religious liberty (what “separation of Church and State” ends up being when practiced) is incredibly inconsistent with our founding principles and directly violates the First Amendment. All we need to do is remain consistent with the wording and meaning of the First Amendment and we’ll be fine. No need to inject things that are not law (”separation of church and state”) into what is law (the First Amendment) in order to make it better. It’s worked as written for a long time.

    As far as someone going to war because God personally told him to do so, I think that’s a pretty fanciful straw-man argument. Do you really think that anyone with such a proclivity could ever get elected to office? And do you really think trashing the First Amendment with a “separation of church and state” doctrine would in any way prevent such a thing?

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Every one of your concerns is adequately handled by our Constitution and the First Amendment.

  23. local gop said on 26 Jul 2010 at 6:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    greg,

    The war because of god comment was made in reference to Bush 43. he claimed more than once that ‘god’ had ordained him to be president for the war, and that god had told him that war was the right option, and that he prayed and knew that war was the right choice.

    the problem with the constitution is the vagueness of the amendment. we have an interpretation process in this country called the court and the supreme court has had a hay day trying to figure out what to make of it. if i could do 1 thing i would go back in time and tell the founders to be a hell of a lot more specific because their vagueness has caused a lot of controversy.

    now i do think that the left and aclu make a big to do about little things like i said earlier. if a small town wants a xmas tree on city hall steps i have no problem with that because a law or regulation or policy is not being established (hence the ‘make no law respecting….’ clause). but, do i believe that prayer should be allowed in school, no. i believe that is an unecessary mix of religion the state. schools are not for prayer and spirituality, they are for learning academics. the house if for the religion and spirituality and it should be left that way.

    mixing religions and state is a slippery slope, and i thinks that’s what jefferson was talking about. looking at his other works and letters, its easy to see that he was in the ‘i’d rather be safe than sorry’ school of thought when it came to balance of powers and even state/religion mixing. of course TJ was perhaps a touch paranoid, but it’s easy to see why.

  24. sahdman said on 26 Jul 2010 at 7:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    We need to get government out of our schools not God. Government schools teach that we are nothing more than glorified monkeys. See academics and spiritually can’t be separated. That could be why the constitution doesn’t mention education. Also I don’t know about the supreme court but I think that the 1st amendment is just fine the way it is. If people want to muddle it up with some “worldly wisdom” thats their problem. While we fight over whether Christians should hold public office or not muslims all over this world and even right here in Fairfax are plotting against us.

  25. Greg L said on 26 Jul 2010 at 7:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    local gop, why nor just apply that same logic to free speech, or perhaps the right to bear arms? Lots of people are concerned with the slippery slope of free speech and gun ownership and get uncomfortable with the exercise of both.

    Maybe we should appoint a small group of trusted leaders — maybe we could call them a politburo — and they could decide which free speech, what witness of faith, and what circumstances of self-defense citizens (still?) are permitted to exercise? They could keep us away from that slippery slope and help prevent anyone getting offended by someone exercising liberties in a potentially irresponsible manner inconsistent with the broader needs of the community.

    Maybe over time we’d even learn these boundaries or respect and responsibility well enough we could do away with this sort of “dictatorship of the proletariat” thing and live in harmony with each other in some sort of communist-like system.

    Strangely, I think I read about this kind of thing before. Some German guys wrote about it. I think they called it a manifesto or something.

  26. local gop said on 26 Jul 2010 at 8:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    greg,
    that’s taking things to the extreme. we need to have wise regulation with guns. all the constitution states is a right to ‘bear arms’. the question becomes, what are arms? are grenades arms? what about assault rifles? what about land mines? arms technology has advanced far beyond anything the founders knew of in 1776 so the obvious question becomes what falls within the scope of freedom to bear arms? the other question is whether we cling to original intent that was laid out in a 1776 world, or do we adapt to a 2010 world?

    with regards to speech, there are already restrictions on speech. the courts have established clear tests to define what is not an acceptable form of speech. there has yet to be an instance that i know of where the court decisions on speech restrictions met as much political and social controversy as a gun restriction.

    and again, i am not saying that free practice of religion is wrong. worship who you want how you want. since we are on the topic of religious freedom, why do many on the right that cling to this freedom of religion have a problem with a mosque being built near ground zero? as long as they legally purchase the property and follow the laws and codes, what’s wrong with it? is not refusing them a permit a violation of freedom of religion?

    my problems arise when we use a specific religion to interpret what the constitution means or how to create and apply laws. is there a problem with a few senators praying once a year? no. is there a problem with saying “this ia a christian nation and we run the nation like Jesus wants”? yes.

  27. Greg L said on 26 Jul 2010 at 9:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    As for ‘is there a problem with saying “this [is] a christian nation and we run the nation like Jesus wants”? yes.’ I think you’re absolutely off the mark. A Christian will use the Bible, when there is clear guidance, to inform him about the way he would vote. To expect a Christian to vote in a manner inconsistent with his religious beliefs demands that he renounce his beliefs and voluntarily put his very soul at risk because some other people may not think the way he does.

    Is your view such that a Christian who believes the Bible as God’s revealed Word to his children must renounce his moral and spiritual values in order to obtain your approval? Or are Bible-believing Christians automatically disqualified from casting a vote because they are a danger to the body politic?

    You’re free to oppose Christians in the political realm, of course. Persecution of Christians is hardly a new development in human history, but it is somewhat of a novel policy approach coming from someone who claims adherence to “Republican values.”

  28. local gop said on 27 Jul 2010 at 4:24 am:
    Flag comment

    it’s utterly absurd to claim Christian persecution. I was raised in the Methodist church and can quote the Bible just as much as any other life-long Christian out there. My religious and spiritual views don’t have to be mixed with my political and policy views.

    My expectation is that a representative/senator/president or whatever elected official leads and votes with the best policy in mind, and with the best outcome for all his constituents at heart. I don’t want a political leader making decisions because of their personal religious views; that goes for Christians, Muslims, Bhuddists, etc. If a Muslim Congressman said that Allah told him to vote a certain way there would be uproar on the right. But a Christian is just being a real American voting a certain way because of Jesus. It’s nothing short of a double standard.

    i have no problem with a leader drawing from their rearing to make decisions; empathy can also be a very powerful tool. i have no problem with a leader taking time to reflect and pray if they so choose on decisions. but i do have a problem when leaders start leading this nation or theit state/locality the way ‘we believe jesus would want.’

    you dont have to read the Bible to figure out what the best policy. if the bible/quran/other religious textx plays a small peripheral part in your decision making process, i have no problem with it. but when it starts taking the place of real policy making through a policy making process, then i start having problems.

Comments are closed.


Views: 1577