The Family
Southwestern Journal of Theology
Volume 49, No. 1 – Fall 2006
Managing Editor: Malcolm B. Yarnell III
By Philip Mathias. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 2005. xiii + 159 pages. Hardcover, $16.99.
When one quotes the Lord’s Prayer or plumbs the depths of its petitions, it is typically to the more well-known version in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 6:9–13) to which one looks rather than Luke 11:2–4. How- ever, journalist Philip Mathias much prefers the version in Luke, which he calls “the perfect prayer” and an “exquisite homily on the spiritual life” (1–2). Mathias believes the search for the kingdom of God is the core of Christianity, and he says the Lord’s Prayer in Luke aptly expresses this search (xii).
Mathias readily admits he has no systematic theological training and is “not a particularly devotional person” (xiii)—ironic, since this book is a spiritual reflection on the Lord’s Prayer! However, Mathias is an accomplished writer, and he does present some interesting insights in a well-written manner. For instance, his description of why God set up a kingdom and how both a king and a kingdom works is helpful to readers, such as this one, who have little firsthand knowledge of an earthly kingdom (72–76). He uses some engaging illustrations, such as the brave Spartans at Thermopylae (74), the heroic efforts of the Santa Marija Convoy tak- ing desperately-needed supplies to the island of Malta in World War II (105–9), and an altruistic cheese maker (147).
Perhaps it is to be expected that Mathias is overly exuberant about this prayer, but some statements clearly go too far. He claims this prayer contains all that a Christian ever needs to pray to God (2); yet, in this prayer Jesus was more likely being illustrative rather than exhaustive. There are other New Testament prayers that cannot fit in any of its petitions, such as Paul’s request for God to remove his thorn in the flesh (2 Cor 12:8) or James’ admonition to ask for wisdom ( Jas 1:5). Mathias advocates using the prayer as a mantra (2), which certainly goes against Jesus’ prohibition of “meaningless repetition” in Matthew 6:7. At times Mathias seems to attribute mystical qualities to this prayer—as if it is a magical incantation (19), but the Lord’s Prayer is not a divinely-sanctioned hocus pocus.
Unfortunately, Mathias’ basic linguistic analysis of the prayer is flawed—arriving at a rigid parallelism in the prayer. Not only is this structure tenuous at times (as are the alleged parallels with the Ten Commandments, 86–89), its “pure” structure is postulated by criticizing Matthew’s allegedly bloated version that has words Mathias claims Jesus never said (4–6)! Also problematic is Mathias’ tendency toward universalism (19, 21, 40, 44, 91–97—in this latter section he includes Muslims in the kingdom of God!). Other problems include: (1) he reflects a typical mainline liberalism, believing Genesis 1–11 is myth (pp. 26–27, 48–49, 110) and condemning homophobia but not homosexual practice (p. 21), and (2) he condones praying to the saints and Mary (pp. 2, 109), both non-biblical practices.
