Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-08-16
IsIt Right to Pray for Rain =

This question we find seriously discuss
ed by persons who regard themselves as
sincere Christians, as real believers IN the
doctrines of the Christian religion.
These remarks find illustration IN the fol-
lowing newspaper (DIsPArcH) chipping
sent to US by friend:
"PRAYING FoR RAMS il right or per-
mlssible to pray for rain! The Religious
Herald (Richmond. Va Of this week quotes
from Christian ThOu7ht some of the views OF
Professor Noah X. DAVIS, OF the University
Of Virginia. on this Interesting and tar
reaching question. Secular journals are
not expected to discuss such questions.
Non nos'rum tdnfds cOmpOners lties. But we
NAV keep our readers posted as TO what IL
said on these abstruse topics by the men
who are entitled TO air their opinions III re-
gard to them. Sowe quote from the Herald
as follows:
- But it is on the limitations Of prayer
| that Professor Davis's views are likely to
awaken the most decided opposition
among what are commonly. called evan
| ceical" Christians. He distinctly holds
| and argues 20 prove that 1t Is irrational
| and wrong TO pray for rain. And We con-
fess that we would like 70 see his argument
answered. The reasoning Is this: Rain
| is as much within the realm OF fixed
| natural law as an eclipse or transit Of
| Venus. The physical order We must be-
| inkling OF science. 1.-THE uniformity Of
nature is the fidelity to God" What ill.,
| telligent Christian could pray for an eclipse
| or q transit Of Venus to be averted! or for
| the course Of the tide to be changed! And
does not every one see that If he did pray
| for any of these things he would be pray
ing for 4 miracle! When you pray tor
rain, are you not. then, praying for a
mlTaclei
| Professor Davis holds that as on in
telligent Christian cannot pray for what
he regards as miracle. SO he cannot rea-
| sonably or really pray tor rain, ami the
only excuse for those who do pray Tor rain
| is their ignorance.
what an influence one man sometimes
exercises over the world of thought How
many young men at the University taxi 4 z
| Professor Davis's ticket Will diner with
| him on this subject"
| Rain is as much within the
realm of fixed natural law as an eclipse or
| q transit of Venus" says this wise philo-
sopher. What if it Is I. Would 1t be wrong
or absurd to pray for an eclipseI or tor u
| transit OF Venus or that they be ayerted
| if d sufficient reason existed for thus pray
| ing? But, the physical order we must
believe to DO fixed If we have the least
| linking of science" Yes. we must believe
it fixed in the sense in which "fXedness
is ordinarily understood. But to believe that
the physical order Is so fixed as TO ex-
clude divine interposition, and action is
to excluds God from His own universe
| to turn God into an nutomation; IS TO al
lege that all divine revelation is lie {; that
the inextinguishable belief of humanity
in all ages IN the reality as well as posi-.
bility of miracles is an insane deluslon
that our Divine Lord wrought no miracles,
and that in the miracles seemingly He
wrought He was simply a pretender and
lying impostor.,
But the uniformity OF nature is the
fidelity of God" says Professor Davis.
This sounds well and is well calculated
to take with the unthinbing and super
fetal. The trouble with it is that it is no,
true. Professor Davis may be very emi.
nent scientist and very exact in his scien.
tific observations, but evidently he is Q
very inexact thinker. The two terms
uniformity Of nature" and fidelity 70
God" are not By any means identical MOI
are they coextensiye. The one reaches tai
beyond the other The fidelity of God y
is infinite. absolute. The uniformity o!
nature" is contingent and finite.
Before mankind can be per.
susded to give up belief in prayer and that
God hears and answers prayer belief in all
religion must be given up and belief IN
God Is our Creator and Preserver.