Via travisstanley.net, an op-ed piece by Raymond J. Lawrence, an episcopal priest, in the NY Times addresses the recent scientific study on the effectiveness of prayer:
RESPONSIBLE religious leaders will breathe a sigh of relief at the news that so-called intercessory prayer is medically ineffective. ...if it could ever be persuasively demonstrated that such prayer "works," our religious institutions and meeting places would be degraded to a kind of commercial enterprise, like Burger King, where one expects to get what one pays for. Historically, religions have promoted many kinds of prayer. Prayers of praise, thanksgiving and repentance have been highly esteemed, while intercessions of the kind done in the Benson study - appeals to God to take some action - are of lesser importance. They represent a less-respected magical wing of religion. In fact, many theologians reject out of hand the notion that any person or group can effectively intercede with God in any respect. Paul Tillich and Karl Barth, the two major Christian theologians of the 20th century (and certainly no opponents of prayer) would have scoffed at the idea. The Lord's Prayer, the central prayer of Christendom, contains no plea for God to influence specific events in people's lives. The news from science will not lead religious people to stop praying for others. Prayers are expressions of empathy that strengthen a caring community and bring comfort to those who are suffering. Comfort in this context undoubtedly has therapeutic health benefits. But scientists should not leap to the assumption that the ruler of the universe can be mechanically requisitioned to intervene in people's suffering or health.
Other recent posts on this subject: Prayer did not help heart patients Ayn Rand Inst. on Prayer Studies So That's What Went Wrong
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer