The Portland daily press., 1873-12-08

| Rev. Newman Hall delivered the closing
| lecture of the NJ. L. A. course to a very large
| audience at City Hall, Saturday evening.
Those who expected to see the typical English
man were disappointed, for Mr.. Hall IS taii'
| high shouldered, spare man, with deep-set grey
eyes and sparse brown hair, aqulllne nose, nigh
| cheek bones, sunken cheeks and proud lips.
Even his whiskers, though mutton chop in
form, creep ND under his decided chin in very
American way. The English information, very
marked as he began to speak, was little noticea-
BILE when he got warmed up to his subject.
The lecture was very like sermon touch
ed up to do duty before a lyceum audience.
The subject was the reasonableness of prayer.
The theme was well handled of course, and if
no new arguments were advanced the old ones
were put in fresh manner and were enforced
oy great wealth of anology and illustration.
The most noticeable thing about the lecture was
the markedifairness with which the arguments
OF the opponents of prayer were presented, and
the candor with which the objections of the
skeptic were treated Mr.. Hall can scarcely be
called great orator, though he once or twice
narrowly escaped being eloquent; but he is a
very effective speaker, and must be power in
pulpit
He began by profuse apologies for his non
appearance on the evening of the 18th ult. !;
then went on to speak of his Lincoln Monu-
mental Association, promising Portland that
her name should be put on brass tablet if she
would contribute to this object SO near his
heart; then told the people before him that
they made up the most magnificent audience
he had ever talked to-whereat they looked at
each other with simpering complacency as who
should say che is man of good Judgment"
then announced as text or starting point a
quotation from Guizot.
In all ages, he said, man has been addicted
to prayer. 1t is an essential element of all re-
ligions, and in assailing it you assail religion
itself. Particularly is it an element of the
Christian religion with its dogma of personal
God, and its belief in His watchful and father
ly care over the individual fortunes oflHis crea-
lures. In nearly every page of scripture we
are exhorted to come into the presence of God
and make our wants and sorrows known. The
sophism that we are always, of necessity, in the
presence OF God, and therefore the injunction is
of little meaning, was dismissed as unworthy
of serious notice.
The skeptic urges that prayer is presump-
tuous, because we ask God to change pre-de-
termined course of action; selfish, because we
ask him to change for our individual benefit;
unreasonable, because science shows natures
laws TO be invarable, because these laws are
merely chain of course and effect because we
know no personal God, but only phenomena.
In discussing this question, said the speaker,
there is no need of getting angry, or of array
ing ourselves in opposition to science. Science
is not the enemy but the hand maid Of religion.
Theology and science may contradict each 9TH
er, because both are human. One is what
know of Gods word, the other what know of
Gods works. Both are necessarily limited.
IS ,a.a l. L.
ers. Some of them would believe if they Could.
Religion has no need to fear them. Doubts
should be welcomed and their expression en-
couraged, for the holding of them shows an in
terest IN religion, thinking upon the subject,
vastly preferable to indifference.
ALI arguments against prayer come to this, that
it is unreasonable because it suppOses a mira
culOuS interference with nature. This objec-
ton of course has no effect with those who hold
to the authority of scripture, for the Bible is
bound up with prayer To the skeptic we re-
ply that the necessary uniformity Of natural
laws, of which he speaks, has yet to be proven.
The existence of law implies the existence of
law-maker, and we cannot in this Instance talk
OF any necessity which binds Him, for the will
of God cannot be fettered, Of little conse-
quence also, is the appeal to history, the state
ment that the laws are uniform because neither
we nor our forefathers have ever, in all recorded
time, known them to be 9th ,rwise Tell the
dweller in the heated sands of Africa that you
have seen seen solid water, water that could be
cut with knife, and he would laugh you to
scorn, for neither he nor his ancestors have ever
seen it. But ice exists for all that These
laws have not been uniform. There have been
variations already in the earth's surface. Yon
may call them developments, but whatever you
call them they are violations of uniformity.
What is there unreasonable in the temporary
or partial suspension of these laws? Every inch
that tree shoots up from the earth is viola
ton of the laws of gravitation, Every time
you thrust out your hand and arrest an object
in its descent to the earth, you violate the law
of gravitation. But the scientists say that
prayer is not a force. 1t is a moral force which
may influence God. The doubter calls prayer
an interference with Gods plan. Then the
physclan who arrests the progress ola disease, the
farmer who improves an acre of land, interferes
with Gods PLAN But there is no interference
with plan. A change of method does not indi-
There is modified scepticism which claims
that that the only benefit of prayer is to him
who prays, in that it gives him dignity and hu-
mility and courage, and makes him better be-
cause he must be sincere to pray. As these
benefits come by praying he feels as if they
come from God. But should we pray if we did
not hope? Should we get the indirect benefits
if we did not believe God would give the direct?
The speaker closed by adducing many instances
of the efficacy of prayer.