Let prayer in Parliament reflect pluralism

SIR— I would like to respond to Nabendeh S. P. Wamoto’s letter in The Sunday Vision of July 7, titled “That parliamentary prayer is false”. Nabendeh argues that he is certain our parliamentarians’ prayer does not go beyond the roof of the House because it is not routed through Jesus Christ, “the mediator of the new covenant”. He encourages born-again Christians in Parliament to “stand up” and invoke God “in the right manner”! May I ask which new covenant is he talking about in the August House? And which “right manner” of prayers? Does he want to imply that “born-again” prayer is the right manner? Come on, wake up, man!Nabendeh further asserts: “Our Muslim brothers and the atheists cannot be the basis of Christian prayers”. Implying that prayers in Parliament should be said in the Christian faith and in the “born-again” format; or that this Parliament is Christian and should not let Islam or atheism have a share in its code of prayer. By this statement he equates Islam to atheism and how irrelevant they are in this Parliament.I would like to remind Nabendeh that constitutionally Uganda is not a Christian state as he is trying to make us believe. And Parliament should not affiliate to a particular religion whatsoever. Many times Christian prayer is used, and this is because Islam and other faiths are still marginalised in in this country. But if Uganda was a truly multi-religious country, Parliament would revisit and change the format of prayer to be a universal one that does not discriminate against any faith, in favour of Christianity. Words such as “through Jesus Christ our Lord” should be expunged from a prayer that is said in a parliament with many categories of faiths, many of which don’t believe in Jesus Christ.A prayer truly representative of the religious pluralism of Uganda should include Christian, Islamic, Jewish, African traditional religion and even atheism. Steps should be taken to rectify the problem.Hussein Kiingi55 Alexandra StreetLondon, E16 4DL