THERE IS NO OTHER NAME.....
Jun 20, 2012
By Todd Starnes....[Fox News]....

For the past seven years Pastor Terry Sartain has ministered to police officers and their families in Charlotte, N.C. Whenever the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Dept. invited him to deliver an invocation, he prayed in “the name of Jesus.”

But not anymore.

Volunteer chaplains in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Dept. will no longer be allowed to invoke the name of Jesus in prayers at public events held on government property.

Major John Diggs, who oversees the chaplain program, told television station WSOC that the policy is a “matter of respecting that people may have different faiths and that it is not aimed at any one religion or denomination.”

Sartain, the pastor of Horizon Christian Fellowship, told Fox News Radio he was scheduled to give an invocation at a promotion ceremony. Before the event, he received a telephone call from his superior major.

“I was told chaplains can no longer invoke the name of Jesus on government property,” Sartain said. “(He said) if I could refrain from that during the invocation he would appreciate that.”

Sartain said he was surprised by the telephone call. The pastor said he’s prayed “consistently” in the name of Jesus at past police department events without any issues.

“I’m very sad about it,” he said. “I’m a pastor and Jesus is the only thing I have to offer to bless people – his life and his person.”

“It brings about a very real concern about where we are heading as a nation,” he said. “I serve a God who loves people unconditionally, who died for their sins on the cross, who wants to reconcile himself to them and love them where they are at – and now I’m told I can’t bless people as a result of that.”

The police department said he could still pray – just not to Jesus.

So to whom was the Christian minister supposed to pray?

“That was my question,” Sartain said. “If I’m going to pray – what should I pray?”

He said the police department wanted him to deliver a “secular prayer.”

“Even when I wasn’t a Christian – in my past – I didn’t even know what a secular prayer was,” he said. “Why even pray if it’s to the one who’s in the room? That could be anybody.”

Sartain said the new policy has put him in a difficult spot.

“You don’t want to compromise your faith,” he said. ‘At the same time you want to honor those who are in charge over you.”

So Sartain asked the police department to withdraw his name from consideration for future public prayers.

“I didn’t really need to do that as a chaplain,” he said of the public prayers. “I still wanted to have the influence with the police officers and their families.”

At least some people in the Charlotte area support the decision to remove the “Jesus-centric” prayers.

“It’s past time when they should’ve made a policy,” ACLU member Jim Gronquist told WSOC. “It’s improper to mix up religion with the function of state agents, and as long as they’re state agents, they should not be able to do that.”

Sartain said it’s apparent that “Christians for the most part are targeted in these days that we exist in.”

“As Christians in the United States of America – what we are saying as believers – is we want the same rights and privileges as everybody else,” he said. “Let the playing field remain level.”....However......

"This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’

....." Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”......!!!

America is changing.

Quote: "So Sartain asked the police department to withdraw his name from consideration for future public prayers.

“I didn’t really need to do that as a chaplain,” he said of the public prayers. “I still wanted to have the influence with the police officers and their families.”"
___________________

So is the chaplain correct in taking his name off the list, or should he defy the authorities and accept the consequences/persecution that comes with it?

_________________
Todd

Acts.4:18

Then they called then in again and commanded then not to speak or teach in the name if Jesus.


Hmm. Not Buddha. Not Mohammed. Just Jesus. Two thousand years later still having problems with his name.

What again is the topic if the upcoming SI conferenc?

I wonder if the Chaplain could have gotten away with it if he said before the prayer;

"If those who desire to say the name of Jesus after the prayer, please do so at your own discretion".

I wonder.......

When Rhode Island became an incorporated Colony, the leaders of those people, inscribed this into their Constitution;

"We, whose names are underwritten, do hereby solemnly, in the presence of Jehovah, incorporate ourselves into a body politic; and as he shall help, will submit our persons, lives, and estates unto our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of kings and the Lord of lords, and to all those perfect and absolute laws of his, given us in his holy Word of truth, to be judged and guided thereby."

Twelve of the thirteen original state constitutions contained explicit acknowledgments of God and Christianity.
(The 1776 Constitution of South Carolina even provided that no person should be eligible to the Senate or House of Representatives unless "he be of the Protestant religion.")

The exception, Virginia, revised its constitution's preamble in 1870, adding "invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God." At least 42 of the state constitutions contain some acknowledgment of God in their preambles.

Article 22 of the Constitution of Delaware (1776) required all officers to profess:

"...."Faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed forevermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine inspiration."

[This, I would say, is far more than most churches in America would require for acceptance into communion. [TW]

The fundamental orders of Connecticut (1638-39) contained these words:

"to mayntayne and preserve the liberty and purity of the gospell of our Lord Jesus, which we now profess, as also the disciplyne of the churches, which according to the truth of the said gospell is now practiced amongst us."

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/amr/amerc.htm

In light of this news story, and the anti-Christian sentiment that is seeping into every part of society in America today, these Colonial Politicians were like fiery preaching prophets of old; as the holiest of the kings of Israel.

I think of America and one scripture, with much sorrow;

"~OH! HOW THE MIGHTY HAVE FALLEN!~"

The chaplain (Sartain) did the right thing in quitting/resigning from his position then. That is exactly what i would have done and exactly what he SHOULD do; no true Christian should ever bow down to that kind of law, cuz to do so would be a very cowardly act and an affront to God who you claim to serve. If those people don't want Jesus, then that is their choice and they will reap the fruits of their choice. Let the blind lead the blind: if that is what they want, then alrighty give it to them. On the day when America falls they will finally realize the path they have chosen. We don't need to do their praying for them anyway. They need to start praying for themselves.

QUOTE: ""If those who desire to say the name of Jesus after the prayer, please do so at your own discretion"."==APPROVED




That would just be a copout (no pun intended). Cowardice. It just sounds so shameful to say that, as if you are too ashamed of the name of CHRIST to say it yourself! If it were me, i would either quit, as the chaplain did, or i would pray in the name of Christ anyway and too bad so sad i don't care who it offends!

To me, this is a form of persecution and could lead to further silencing of the Christian influence, yet as our society becomes more diversified and scriptures are further fulfilled I think we will all experience similar situations. Perhaps not in the leading of but participating in public or open prayer.
I have on occasion questioned a correct personal approach or means of handling such a situation which would be pleasing to God. I don't desire to offend anyone, yet I certainly do not desire to offend God via compromise.
There will always be a problem when different religious groups attempt to join in worship and in prayer. I understand the concept of avoidance but there would seem occasion when that is near impossible. Should the Chaplain have martyred himself and prayed in Jesus' name? Daniel also comes to mind. I watch for more troubled times ahead.