New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-12-17

III no case enter lntO the Kingdom u
heaven"
We find, therefore. that the SERMON on
the mount. CT which so much is said as be
ing sufficient foundation of Christianity
was not original, so far us the matter OF
which 1t was composed is concerned. II
simply grouped amt gathered together all
those elements of truth which had already
been disclosed. The Sermon on the Noun,
had not one single sentence about faith; is
there no faith in Christianity. 1t had not
a single word about Christ, or a Redeemer;
is there no Redeemer in Christianity, 1t ha,.
not syllable on the subject OF death or
Immortality: is there no death or i'm
mortality in Christianity 1t had nothing
OF future punishment or reward; is there
nothing of these in Christianity, Can that
be all Of Christianity which has no teach
ing of an eternal world nor of an atoning
Saviour The Sermon on the Mount was
IN some respects true exposition of Chris
tianity. or a part of it-tEat part which
had been derived from the Jewish church.
Gathering together in that matchless dis
course the best things which had been
brought to light, he said as it were, Take
these. now. into the spiritual life. Let
them contribute to your highest develop
ment. Adopt this prayer as yours When
it is claimed as jewish give it to the Jews:
but it was inspired by jehovah. although it
came through the old ,li.pensation: and it
is just as good for your purpose as though
il had been first uttered by me.
Nothing Is taken from ii to prove that it
was in existence before Christ'S time. The
beauty and power OF it do not depend upon
It's being shown to have been first thought
OF when the Saviour announced il to his dis
ciples. 1t is the combination of the elc
ments OF which 1t is composed. and their
Incorporation into a higher spiritual life
that makes them beautiful and powerful.
Another question arises. was this prayer
OF our Saviour a model and suggestion OF
PRAYER. or was II 4 form to be used liturgi-
calIy: hold il to have been suggestion.
There l. no objection to using it as Il form
liturgica!lv: but there is no evidence and
much to the contrary that our Saviour de-
siGned that TIE disciples should take this
prayer. and repeat it word for word. Iituryi-
cally. ii he had SO desi gned. the varia-
tlans OF phraseologv in Luke and Matthew
would be- unaccoUntahle and me xplicablc
More than this. II it was to be set form,
and obligatory. how does it happen that
there is no further alh,,ion to it in the New
Testament, The Saviour never referred to
1t except On this one occasion. There was
no reference made to it by the apostles in
their instructions to the churches. Chris
tlan churches existed for more than fifty
years without written gospel: and there
is no lint that by tradition or otherwise. It
was Imperative upon Christians to repeat
the Lords PRAYER in the form in which it
stands. 1t was three hundred years before
1t began 10 take on that form. which after
ward became superstition, until the Puh,
-N"S'er Gegenerated almost into contempt
The repetition Of it, once twice. hundred
times. was supposed to have some virtue
The counting of beads. saying the Lords
PRAYER at every one OF them. thus multiply
ing the mere "vain repetitions" by scores
and hundreds. was prescribed. and vas sup
posed to have some inherent benefit in it,
This shows how degenerate the Christian
heart and imag ination had become.
That we are permitted to repeat the
Lord prayer as part of the liturgy.
need not argue: but the question as to the
wisdom ofiormulated prayer. as to whether
It Is better that a PRAYER should be pre-
srrlbed and followed in sequence. and in
the same terms always. is involved: and
about that have only to say that they who
ind they can pray better out of the book
nave Gods dear privilege to pray out of
he book. That road in which your feet
ascend easiest and fastest toward the lleay-
MY gate is Your road: and you need no |
'rirst. Il" minister no authority 70 walk in
T. II Won can pray more to e,litcation by
he Formulated prayers of the church than |
~ rXt-hporanfous prayers. so pray. 1t is |
lot TOY he to cast any dispersion upon them. |
or Is 1t tor You TO tiirn upon me and say |
hat eNteMpuraneouS prayers are indecent !
md unedit>in lon have a right to say
hat they do not tdity You. but not to say |
hat they do not e'lIiv me and other people
1t seems unnecessary that there should |
'e ii perpetual jar and collision between the
wo schools. one of whom write their PRAYERS
nj then read them. and the other of
7Lom speak out OF their souls extemro-
anrouSly.
la regard 10 public service there is this to
y said: that where linen have the gift of
raEer. II Woilid seem far more tdifyinu
nat one should pray out of his heart and
XrerIencc and I'D .ment. and out of the
Of the want of the community
. winch he ministers. On the other hand
here luen have not the gift OF PRAYER,
here their eXtemporancouS prayers are dry
nj useless. one naturally longs for the
lately grandeur OF the prayers of the
ook-for. II we speak of written PRAYERS.
course We think OF those in the dear old
Episcopal prayer boUk-the book of our
ifhers. although | was not brought up
1 the Episcopal church, that church to me
full of venerahleness. And. indeed |
m filled with gratitude to it for the great
-rvice which it has done to Christianity
trough so many ages. Therefore it seems
|
nose use the book who find the NEST edit
alton in it: and let those who find their
ITS leading them outside the book have
itir liberty. Bear with each other and
.Joict each IN tie others gifts and iber-
In private prayer, however. it seems to
e prominently desirable thar men should
Ut lean on the crutches of the book: that
very one III his own household. and cspeci-
In al -. I
vt learned already. to commune with God
one speaks to another. face to face |
n tar more clear and decided on this point
IAN | am upon the ether
lth these prelmlnaries. let Us analvze
little the contents OF the Lords PRAYER.
e will take it as it is recorded in Mat ,
ew
After this manner. therefore, pray ye I
ur Father, which art in heaven ,
Here you have the standpoint. We are T
come to God not as the subjects of q
oharch. sun less are WE to come as alb q
ct servants. And certainly we are NOT TO +
me into the presence of God as slaves
me trembling into the presence of their =,
spot. The very opening of the prayer t
aces us III filal relation to God. One !
lSht say that no man prays well the
aver of the Lord whose heart does nor Y
st cry ont My Father 1t is the call t
the soul to Its dearest and best
avenly, friend: and no man who v
merely reNerentlal can pray this y
aver. Bow down the head till il touches 8
e ground. Let the heart be weighed down |,
til awe and veneration that does not on y
he the lip to speak word Alright. 1t is not :
lat breaks us down before God that fits us u
80 INTO His presence. 1t Is that which &
+ us up toward Him. 1t is our yearniuo e
: Him. our realization of His true patcr- II
~, and our corresponding tilal affection o
ward Him. which give us liberty to saw $,
"a first nf "a. I | ..