I’m not Christian, but considering how some loud Christians respond to Happy Holidays, I imagine some would take offense. And, those saying “I’ll pray for you” are more likely, in my imagination, to take offense to “I’ll pray to Allah for you” or whatever.
As I said above, it’s really only Christians who say “I’ll pray for you.”
TBF, this impression may be specific to experiences of Christian-majority societies? IME religious non-Christians in cultures where they’re the majority can sometimes make similarly casual statements about their intention to confer a benefit on you by some kind of religious observance that they don’t know, or particularly care, that you’re on board with.
Religious minorities tend to be a little more cautious about assuming that their benevolent intentions will be appreciated by others.
Christian doctrine generally considers it to pertain to idolatry. I don’t think that most of the Christians who tell others “I’ll pray for you” would be comfortable with being offered condolence and support in the form of what they consider idolatrous beliefs and actions.
And in any case, responding to any suffering person’s polite rejection of one’s declaration of intent to pray for them with anything along the lines of "you don’t think it will help, but I do, and I’m the one who’ll be doing it” is really crossing the line into “being a dick” territory, IMHO. If we really want to offer comfort to somebody who’s suffering, how about we start with not smugly insisting that it’s appropriate for us to perform on their behalf a religious observance that they find no value in, or that is even outright offensive to their own beliefs?
I have absolutely no idea. Maybe in Taliban-controlled country, you get fired if you don’t offer to pray to someone.
So, if someone told me they would pray for me, hows about if a week later I call them to complain. My condition has continued to decline and I want to know if they’ve really been praying.
For one thing, while I can certainly imagine some people will react like that, I can also imagine much worse reactions. Bear in mind that the person offering to pray may well also believe that non-believers – including the recently deceased, if they happened to agree with the one supposedly being comforted – are all going to Hell.
I’ve had somebody come up to me at the funeral of a friend and start talking about the fear of hellfire after death. The person whose funeral we were at was a member of a quite conservative church (which of course is where the funeral was held) but had never given me any sort of hard time about it; he’d invited me to church once, then dropped it when I politely declined. I was a whole lot younger then, and I thought for a moment that the one talking to me was worried about the deceased, and responded with ‘Oh, you don’t have to worry about him! He was certainly one of the world’s good people!’. It wasn’t until he looked clearly taken aback that I realized he hadn’t been worried about the deceased at all. He was talking about me, and thought that the funeral of someone I was also grieving for was a suitable situation in which to try, not just to invite me, but to scare me into joining his church.
– you’ll note that I didn’t reply to him with ‘you don’t have to worry about it, there isn’t any Hell’: because it was clear what his beliefs were, and I definitely did not think it was a suitable situation in which to try to argue him out of them. The deceased actually had been a mensch, and while I wouldn’t have put it that way because the word wouldn’t have been understood, I had no problem with saying so.
This is also true. Someone who genuinely thinks it’ll help can go ahead and pray anyway, of course – but they need to shut up about it. Accidental ignorance is one thing – but they’ve been made no longer ignorant about whether that particular griever finds prayer comforting. Insisting to the uncomforted grieving person that they’re going to do it anyway makes it clear that they’re not trying to comfort that person at all.
Indeed.
This whole discussion started when you insisted on one specific interpretation (“They’re assuming that…”), and I’ve been trying to argue that, no, there are other possible meanings and interpretations. There are all sorts of things that the person offering to pray may or may not believe.
True. However, in the context given, they clearly expect that particular offer to be comforting (at least, if they’re not being deliberately aggressive.)
So why on earth do they think it would be comforting, to the person they’re speaking to, if they’re not assuming that the person they’re speaking to shares their belief?
I’ve already tried to answer that, and I don’t know if I can do so any better than I have already. But I’ll give it one more shot.
If I am doing something for you that I think will help, but that you think is totally useless, might you not be comforted by the thought that I care enough about you to do something that I think may help, even if you are convinced that it will not?
Suppose you have lost something—your keys, your mittens, whatever. You’ve been at my house relatively recently, so I offer to look around at my house and see if they are there. “No, I’m sure I didn’t lose them there,” you tell me, although you are unable to explain how you know for sure that they couldn’t be there.
I, on the other hand, am not so sure that they couldn’t be there. Maybe I remember seeing you lay them down when you were at my place. Maybe I have no reason to believe they could be there other than that you haven’t found them anywhere else yet.
If I tell you, “I’m going to go ahead and look anyway,” it’s not unreasonable for you to be grateful that I care enough about you to take the trouble to look, even though you believe it’s a wasted effort on my part. (It might also be not unreasonable for you to be a bit upset at me for not believing you when you said you were sure they weren’t there. Both feelings could even coexist at the same time.)
One more thought: It can be difficult to imagine what it’s like to believe something that you don’t, in fact, believe. And this goes both ways. If a Christian (or other theist) offers to pray for an atheist, they may know, intellectually, that the atheist doesn’t believe in the efficacy of prayer, but they may not really understand that on a deep level. And the atheist being prayed for may not fully understand that, from the point of view of the pray-er, they’re doing something that they genuinely believe to be real and helpful.
So why TF would any reasonably empathetic person insist on announcing to the person coping with the loss their stubborn intention of doing something that the other person does not want them to do, does not have any reason to think will help the situation, and directly contradicts their views on the situation? Surely anybody who isn’t a dick but personally believes that the search might be helpful would prefer to just conduct that search privately, without such self-congratulatory announcements?
And then if they find some objective evidence that the search actually is helpful (as in, “Oh look, here are the lost mittens!”), then they can announce that to the other person and it will actually make them feel better.
IMHO, the dicks who insist on announcing their prayer intentions to people who have already politely told them that they don’t consider prayer beneficial are doing so just to scrounge for gratitude for an act that in itself makes them feel virtuous. People who genuinely care about their friends’ suffering don’t lay that shit on them.
Well the op has, by now, been answered: yes there are some who will be offended. And if you feel that you want to avoid doing harm then avoid such language unless you are sure how it will received.
Whether or not my internal eye roll counts as taking offense or not, I am minimally made uncomfortable by that statement. I do not want to thank them for their assumption that I share their, no mistake about it, Christian perspective that telling that is of comfort. But assuming no ill intent I do not want to insult either. Putting me in that place is not giving me comfort. Maybe not quite as bad as “well she’s with god now, a better place” but of the same sort.
Funny enough I would be less annoyed by a question: “May I include you in my prayers?”
That makes no assumptions. It allows the space for “Actually I’d prefer not, but thanks for the thought.” or “If it helps you I do not object.” And for “Yes, that is sweet, thank you.”
The just announcing it to someone who may be of a different belief set reminds me of those Mormon baptisms posthumously of Jewish Holocaust victims.
Just don’t. You may think you are saving souls. It may make you feel better. But don’t.
I’ve never been to your house, so the only way it could be there is if you stole it.
That’s just it. It is absolutely unreasonable to expect me to be grateful for offering me something that I don’t want.
And that’s where the friction comes in. The theist offers to pray for you, and expects a reaction of gratitude for it. If they don’t get that gratitude, then they consider you to be ungrateful.
So, the person who is suffering a loss is being put into a situation where they either have to worry about your feelings and put them ahead of their own, or risk offending you.
Why would you do that to someone that you supposedly care about?
In my hypothetical, yes you have:
It is this kind of mind-reading that I keep trying to rebut. This is one possibility for what they are thinking or expecting, but not the only one.
Why should I have to explain how I came to the conclusion that their God doesn’t exist?
They’re unlikely to agree with the explanation; and any attempt of mine to convince them would amount to my trying to proselytize them into atheism. I think it’s wrong to insist on arguing anybody either into or out of a religious belief, I’m not going to do that. But even if I thought it were a right and proper thing to do, why should I have to get into a long theological argument with a random casual acquaintance at any time, let alone when I’m in the middle of grieving?
And why should I be expected to take a claim that I need to as comforting?
So how about we drop the limitation that I can’t explain how I know that the keys aren’t there? How about we take it that when I said ‘no, the keys aren’t there’, I did indeed have reason to say so, I just have very good reason not to want to explain that reason in detail? In which case, your insisting that it’s useful for you to look for the keys in your house, where I’m sure that they’re not, is somewhere between annoying and deliberate gaslighting.
You may think that you’re making it clear to me that you’re willing to take trouble for me. But it seems to me that you’re making it clear to me that you’re not respecting me, and that you think you’re entitled to ignore what I say. There’s nothing whatsoever comforting about that.
– you’d also be taking trouble for me if you came in and cleaned my house without my permission. But no matter how much you believed that my house needed cleaning, and even if it were true that my house needed cleaning, I’d still be pissed off that you ignored my instructions to stay out. The amount of trouble that it took you doesn’t cancel that out.
What you’re getting persistent pushback about is not what the prayer-proclaimer may be “thinking or expecting”, but what they are doing. We are describing to you how this insensitive behavior comes across to many people who don’t share the prayer-proclaimer’s belief system.
I don’t care how much your (generic “you”) heart may be overflowing with sincere loving sympathy towards me (generic “me”) in my distress. If you can’t figure out a way to express that sympathy to me that respects my politely expressed preference to be disassociated from your unsolicited expressions of religious belief, then you are acting like a self-regarding dick, and should cut it out.
Yeah, which is why we’re talking past one another. I agree that it is insensitive behavior and that they should not do it. I haven’t been defending the behavior, just suggesting a more chatitable interpretation for the motivation behind it.
Your “message” is aimed at people who perpetrate this behavior (your “generic you”), although I’m not sure there are any such people reading this thread. Mine is aimed at people on the receiving end.
I’m pointing out that your hypothetical doesn’t reflect reality. If I have been to your church, or in any way expressed religious tendencies towards you, then you could make that assumption.
You are insisting that I have been to your house, when I never have been, that’s what’s presumptuous.
It’s not mind reading, it’s reading what you wrote.
You expect me to be grateful. You expect me to react by expressing gratitude. If I do anything but lie to you and tell you that I am thankful for your effort, then you will think me to be rude.
If you want to pray for me because you think it will help, knock yourself out. If you feel the need to tell me, it’s because you want something from me.
Just as (let’s say I have been to your house), if you want to look in your house for what I lost, that’s up to you. But after I told you that I know I had my keys because I drove home, so they cannot possibly be at your house, don’t expect me to be grateful if you tell me you are going to look anyway.
So, you tell me, if you tell someone that you are praying for them, what reaction do you expect from them?
And then it depends on the specifics. Likely the vast majority of the time it is accurate to assume the person meant well, again just like those “in a better place now” people do, and are less aware of the discomfort they may be causing than Mormons who posthumously baptized Holocaust victims.
I don’t think anyone here is claiming that such wishes would cause horrible upset, or that they would do much or anything to act on any offense they received. Whether or not they would think lesser of the person for the remark would depend on what they thought of them before. If anything.
I more and more think of this as a consent issue. Don’t hug a co-worker without knowing them well enough to know they want a hug, or asking permission first. Don’t impose your religiousity on them without similarly knowing first. “May I include you in my prayers?” , asking permission, is probably okay.
My hypothetical was my attempt to come up with a situation in which Person A does something for Person B that Person B thinks is pointless and useless, yet Person B may still be appreciative or comforted that Person A is doing it, because “it’s the thought that counts.” (It was specifically in response to @thorny_locust’s question: “why on earth do they think it would be comforting, to the person they’re speaking to, if they’re not assuming that the person they’re speaking to shares their belief?”)
I’m sorry if my hypothetical didn’t work for you, but I thought it was reasonably realistic. You may be looking for a closer parallel to the “praying for” situation than what I intended.
If you’re asking me personally? I don’t, typically. This isn’t about me trying to justify my own behavior.
If you mean “you” generically, to refer to anyone who does tell others they’re praying for them: I don’t know, but I strongly expect it’s different for different people: there’s no one interpretation that applies in all situations. That’s the point.
That’s the trouble with microaggressions. We historically have placed the onus on the receiver (usually a minority or otherwise ‘out group’ person) to charitably interpret the actions of the majority ‘in group’ person. We laid blame on the receiver for being offended by something that was done without malice, as if lacking malice was enough effort for the other person to exert.
These HR policies, DEI, is about informing the majority that lacking malice isn’t enough, you need to actively respect the fact that others do not share your beliefs, actively respect the differences rather than pretend we are all just like you.