Return to

However, logically speaking, the term seems to coopt ownership of the word “warrior” for peaceful purposes; it has an Upside-down Kingdom ring to it. In a sense, the very notion of a “prayer warrior” is subversive to a system of violence, representing a Gandhian approach to conflict that is both confrontational and peaceful.

Hmmmm, as I think out loud though, is the very notion of warring antithetical to what prayer should be? “Warrior” (even tempered of its violence by the word “prayer”) implies that you are on one side of a conflict that you have refused to reconcile. We all know that prayer at its worst can be very selfish. If our intent is to pray for vague notions of “justice” or “God’s will” (rather than for a specific outcome), then the imagery of a prayer warrior may be inappropriate. Yet even “justice” and “God’s will” tend to have relevant, concrete meanings do us. So how do we resolve the need to actually “pray for something” without being warriors for a particular human cause?

Gandhian philosophies of conflict confrontation are rooted in the acceptance of fallibility: complete rejection of violence is essential because we may be erroneous in believing that justice is on our side. Nonviolent action allows us stand up boldly for a specific cause without becoming “warriors” who have rejected reconciliation; it is the antidote for many paradoxes.

Gandhi’s movement early on had a semantical struggle over naming their technique of confrontation. They were in the midst of something like a war, but they were clearly different than warriors. They came up with the word “Satyagraha,” meaning “soul-force” (roughly equivalent to what we mean by “nonviolent action”). The practioner of Satyagraha is called a satyagrahi (the nonviolent equivalent of a warrior). A satyagrahi is committed to humility, compassion, nonviolence, and justice.

Therefore, I humbly suggest “prayer satyagrahis” to describe the group that is praying over the pastoral transition process.

I think that would be neat. But I also like RyanH’s idea of picking a personal name.

http://www3.timeoutny.com/newyork/theframeup/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/warriors.jpg

Can you say “AWESOME!”? I picture costumes for all of your various groups that meet in prayer.

“Intercessors” is a tried-and-true one. It’s easy, safe, and works.

You could also give yourselves a personal name, and describe yourselves using terms like “prayer team” or “intercessor.” That name could be anything you want. Something meaningful to you, but it wouldn’t need to communicate much beyond your community. “The Circle” “The Watch” “Vigil” or the even The “PPP” (Power and Principality Patrol), if you want to be a bit cheeky.

The point is, name your group. Then worry about describing it.

I do appreciate that people are trying to get away from violence. We don’t need any more violence.

Something like this: “The Intercessors.”

prayer activists- hmm, thanks. let’s keep thinking.

what do people use in their congregations?

I know the etymological root of the English word is connected with “war”, but we use words in ways that are disconnected from their etymological roots all the time.

Anyway, just worth remembering that “warriors kill and train to dominate and decimate their enemies” is just one possible interpretation of the word.