Year: 1879




But have we not right to pray for some
special and desired temporal good or tempo
raj resulsl The answer is: If the thing
sought be not in itself sinful and forbidden,
we have right to pray for it but we have
no certainty that We shall get it. And We
cannot be too cautious lest We so fix cur
hearts on it, that we are tempted to rebel
and do rebel because zoe do not get lt. A sig
nal illustration of this occurred in connection
with our late war. Thousands Of devout and
pious people in the South prayed earnestly
and sincerely for the success and establish
mens of the Confederate Cause. God did
not, in his wisdom, see fit to grant it; and
therefore it is q we'll known fact that many
of these uureAecting and ILL poised Christians
were profoundly discouraged on the vital
subject of the efficacy of prayer Could
ANYTHING more clearly demonstrate the dis
siuOsishr SSswSea prAysr. Fer spiritual bless
isgs and prayer for temporal good or show
more completely how dangerous it is Co have
false ideas on the subject? Neither is 1t
true. as some ministers inccnsiderstsly tell
their people, that we may pray for special
temporal merciss With the certain assurance
that if God does not grant the special one
prayed for, BE will grant some other tempo
raj blessing or protection in the place Of it.
No such dScrine is taught in the Scriptures
or involved in any sound theory of prayer.


But while al this is true, we must here at
tend o 8 dissiucsiou which exists as to pray
er for temporal blessings or results of differ
snt kinds. By Ignoring this distinction, em.
iueut scisotisls Of our day, including not only
Professor Tyndall, but such men as Newcomb
and lie Conte sre fast gaining for themselves
q title 70 be ranked among practical as well
as theoretical Atheists They deny the eff
cacy of prayer for temporal results on the
ground that to grant such prayers would be
60 change the established course of Nature
in other words, to work miracle, which they
insist that God, in these days, ought not to
be expected to do.


A very simple exposition seems adequate
TO show that no mirscle-Working is requisite
in order that God may grant favorable an
swer to prayer for temporal results. The
writer of the editorial, Science and Pray
err" has presented some sound views on this
subjsct, but they do not seem to explain the
exact difference between miracle and what is
called she ordinary course of Nature, and
how prayer may enter into the latter, and
become g cause producing an effect in real
accord with ordinary law.


To explain the difference between the or
binary course Of nature aud miracle, we must
dismiss from our minds the atheistic idea Sc
Ruentiy set forth, even n some school books
of the present day, ths. force is inherent in
msster-is in fact part of it, or at least il
insepsrsble from it in time and eternity


Force, Power, Cause are al the same
thiug, and sll from God. The universe j:
governed by laws whicO under HIS cOntro
work uniformly under all ordinary circum
stances. This produces uniform course o
Nature, which is most blessed, wise, ant
merciful arrangement of God-WithOut which
his rational creatures would be rational il
vain. For if Nature were not uniform, ",
could not provide for ourselves and our chill
dren from day to day; we could not expec
the sun to rise to. morrow; or the wheat Il
grow when sowed in the cultivated field; o.
che food We eat to sustain and nOurish on
bodies.


Yet, from time to time in the history o
the universe, at long intervals between esc
intervention, and always for the purposes o
a divine crisis which called for such inter
vention, We have the testimony of good an
inspired men that God has interVened in th
course of Nature, and for time Suspende
her laws, and by the application Of speci'
energies in q special manner, has vrOugi
miracles, such as the opening of pssssg
through the Red Sea, the feeding of thOr
sands With seven lOsVes and fishes, and tn