“May this be the beginning of a new dawn for America as we humble ourselves before you and acknowledge you alone as our Lord, our Savior and our Redeemer,” said Graham, the fiery son of evangelist Billy Graham. “We pray this in the name of the Father, and of the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”

Four years later, the word showed up again.

“Now, unto You, O God, the One who always has been and always will be, the one King of kings and the true power broker, we glorify and honor You,” said the Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell of Windsor Village United Methodist Church in Houston. “Respecting persons of all faiths, I humbly submit this prayer in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.”

Scholars who keep watch over the rites of American civil religion took note of the firestorms caused by these prayers. Clearly, it was becoming dangerous to use the J-word — the name of Jesus — in the public square.

But it’s old hat for Republicans to use explicit God-talk. This year, Sen. Barack Obama and his team went out of the way to invite progressive and even mainstream Evangelicals to the Democratic National Convention — including taking a turn at the podium. This was cutting-edge prayer in an age of theological tolerance.

One lesser-known voice backed out at the last moment — Cameron Strang, the 32-year-old editor of Relevant Magazine and son of publishing magnate Steven Strang of Charisma magazine. Nevertheless, Strang the younger was willing to arrange for a rising star to take his place — Donald Miller, author of the spiritual memoir “Blue Like Jazz.”

Miller ended his prayer with a call for unity within diversity, but also found a way to say “Jesus” without causing trouble.

“God we know that you are good. Thank you for blessing us in so many ways as Americans,” said Miller. “I make these requests in the name of your son, Jesus, who gave his own life against the forces of injustice. … Amen.”

The key was that Miller stressed the word “I,” making sure that his listeners knew he was claiming this was his own prayer — not asking them to share his embrace of the second person of the Christian Trinity.

Still, when it comes to church-state strategy, the most groundbreaking prayer was offered by the Rev. Joel Hunter of the giant Northland Church near Orlando — especially since his benediction ended the mile-high rally that included Obama’s acceptance speech.

A self-identified “pro-life Republican,” the preacher offered a conventional prayer that included appeals on behalf of infants, children, the poor, the persecuted and those who are enslaved, as well as for peace and for the environment. Then, at the end, Hunter paused to interject a unique “closing instruction.”

“I want to personalize this,” he said. “I want this to be a participatory prayer. And so therefore, because we are in a country that is still welcoming all faiths, I would like all of us to close this prayer in the way your faith tradition would close your prayer. So on the count of three, I want all of you to end this prayer, your prayer, the way you usually end prayer. You ready? One, two, three.”

Hunter, on his own behalf, spoke into the microphone: “In Jesus’ name, Amen.” Meanwhile, 80,000 or so other people were free to name their own God or gods.

After fielding questions about his actions, the pastor stressed that it would be “taking the Lord’s name in vain” if he created confusion in such a setting. The goal was ensure that participants did not believe they were being asked to accept a prayer that forced them to “compromise their core beliefs.”

Thus, “I did not ask people to pray to another god; I asked them to finish a prayer according to their faith tradition,” argued Hunter, on his church’s website. “This may be a small point linguistically, but it is a huge point theologically. …

“As you may imagine, I prayed long and hard before feeling like God had given me the precise words for this prayer. I believe that He in His sovereign way will use it to bring people to Himself.”

But this life, on this world, is just the beginning. Consider this glimpse into eternity, drawn from a funeral eulogy for President Spencer W. Kimball in 1985.

“In the Colorado Rockies, I asked President Kimball a searching question,” recalled Barbara B. Smith, the 10th general president of the church’s Relief Society. “‘When you create a world of your own, what will you have in it?’ He looked around at those mountains for a few minutes before he answered and then he said, ‘I’ll have everything just like this world because I love this world and everything in it.’ “

After all, added Smith: “What is our greatest potential? Is it not to achieve godhood ourselves?”

This is the question that will not die when Mormons face the leaders of traditional Christian groups to discuss that blunt question: “Are Mormons Christians?”

A fussy feud over doctrinal details? Ask Mitt Romney about that.

This concept of devout Mormons achieving godhood and creating worlds “is not an idea that would be foreign to Mormons today, but it is also not a concept we hear a lot about,” said religion professor Robert Millet of Brigham Young University, a veteran of many interfaith dialogues.

Still, it’s clear that this belief — called “exaltation” — is something that remains “conceivable to Mormons, while it is absolutely inconceivable to traditional Christians.” But for modern Mormons, he stressed, there is little or no difference between talking about “exaltation” and talking about salvation and “eternal life.”

When it comes to the very nature of God, Mormons have radically different beliefs than traditional Christians. For starters, Mormons reject Trinitarian Christianity and believe that the Father God of this world is a former man who, like Jesus, has a physical, perfected body. This Heavenly Father is married to a Heavenly Mother, creating a celestial family that is the cornerstone of Mormon teachings about family and eternity.

Most debates about these topic begin with a 1844 sermon by Mormon prophet Joseph Smith, in which he stated: “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret. ? I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity, I will refute that idea.”

Note that if Mormons can achieve godhood and create new worlds, this implies there are other gods ruling their own worlds. For the many critics of Mormonism, this mystery can be captured in one word — “polytheism.”

“I think ‘polytheism’ is used … to describe the multiple gods of, say, the Greeks and the Romans,” Boyd K. Packer, now acting president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, told me in a 1986 interview. “We are talking about something entirely different, and that word conjures up ideas that are not accurate.

“I suppose that technically, it means ‘many gods.’ Technically, the word is all right. … It carries a lot of baggage.”

These issues loomed overhead as Romney delivered his recent “Faith in America” address. Thus, he risked this profession: “What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church’s beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history.”

Romney was in a tough spot, said Millet, who attended the speech. It was a classic “danged if you do and danged if you don’t” situation as the candidate affirmed his heritage while reaching out to the conservative Protestants and Catholics who are so crucial in Republican races today.

It’s crucial to understand, said Millet, that Mormons are determined to retain their unique beliefs, while striving to clarify the differences between the actual “doctrines of the church and what you might call a kind of Mormon folklore.”

The results will pacify few hostile outsiders. But the trend is clear.

“Throughout the church,” he said, “our faith is much more Christocentric — more centered on the redemptive work of Jesus Christ — than the Mormonism that I knew as a boy in the 1950s. That has affected everything that we say and do.”