and think that we are altogether such as they are, imagine that the sword we received from God was like king Arthur's,—

"On one side,

Graven in the oldest tongue of all this world, 'Take me,' but turn the blade and you shall see, And written in the speech ye speak yourself, 'Cast me away," "

and urging on us this last word forget that we are counselled by a wiser than old Merlin,

"Take thou and strike! the time to cast away Is yet far off."

Yes! "is yet far off." Our work is not done. It is only the grey morning with us. Let us be true to the truth we have and the advantages God has given us, feeling that though single voices chime in with ours that does not absolve us from bearing our united testimony, and we shall yet do better service for Christ our Lord and King.

And could we possibly have a more favourable opportunity for enthusiastic evangelistic effort? Ought we not to preach the acceptable year of the Lord in the regions beyond? Is it not our duty to take our share of the work of "sounding abroad the word of the Lord ?" We dwell in an atmosphere charged with bracing currents of thought and influence. Memories of past heroism and sacrifice stimulate us to new consecration. The supreme duty of the hour is the extension of the kingdom of Christ. We must do this. Everything binds us to it.

"Glory of warrior, glory of orator, glory of song, Paid with a voice flying by to be lost on an endless sea

Glory of virtue, to fight, to struggle, to right the wrong

Nay, but she aimed not at glory, no lover of glory she:

Give her the glory of going on and still to be.

The wages of sin is death: if the wages of virtue be dust,

Would she have heart to endure for the life of the worm and the fly?

She desires no isles of the blest, no quiet seats of the just,

To rest in a golden grove, or to bask in a summer sky:

Give her the wages of going on, and not to die."

"Going on,"-this is our strength and song. "Going on," "winning souls for Christ,"—this is our attitude in the Centenary year. "Going on," telling the news of the love of God, who gave His Son Christ Jesus "to be the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but for the sins of the whole world,”—this is our message. "Going on," cheered with the comfortable words addressed to us by our Leader, whose cross we bear, "Lo I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world,"-this is our unfailing, inspiration.

J. CLIFFORD.

pletely vindicate prayer from the cavils of the irreligious, because of their moral inability to appreciate its advantages. There are, however, certain aspects of the question which ought to have great force in checking the flippancy with which prayer is treated, even if they fail to carry conviction of prayer's exceeding value.

First. The disbeliever in prayer occupies a strangely isolated position. Prayer has been the habit of most men, and is generally recognised as the duty of all men. It has prevailed under every form of religion, through all nations and ages. A sense of want and dependence has been felt even among heathen, together with a desire to propitiaté the gods. Men have everywhere believed in the utility of prayer. The objector to it contravenes the practice, and questions the common sense of all mankind.

The sacred writers not only teach that God commands prayer, and is willing to hear it, but they furnish numerous instances of successful prayer, show prayer to have been the universal habit of good men, and urge on all men its obligation and importance. These writers, if not inspired as Christians believe, were at least the most extraordinary writers and thinkers which the world has produced, immeasurably above others in their ethics and theology. Jesus Christ, who was, at least, the purest spirit, and the noblest teacher of the race, was pre-eminently a man of prayer. Though He needed it least He practised it most, and insisted on it beyond all other teachers. The devout men who lived in different circumstances and times, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Job, David, Daniel, Paul, believed in prayer, and testified to its value. Among the advocates of prayer are found men of high intellect and genius, men of taste, culture, and philosophy, whom no man has suspected of fanaticism; our Miltons, Newtons, Bacons, Lockes, names which occupy the foremost rank in literature and science. They saw nothing absurd or unphilosophical in prayer, but deemed it a part of the highest philosophy. Those who have been earnest in prayer are unanimous as to its results in their experience. They associate it with their peace of mind, their blessedness, their growth in divine virtue,

and their power of "doing good." Prayer has been the atmosphere in which they lived. They were not to be beguiled or deterred from the practice. The prison, the rack, the stake, did not shake their faith in it. Like the dying Stephen they prayed in the hour of martyrdom.

The witness of unbelievers may be added to the testimony of the devout, for in times of great calamity thousands of them have prayed. A sudden catastrophe, or the alarm of approaching death, has brought many a stout infidel to his knees. The mariners who were with Jonah in the tempest prayed every man to his god! Volney, when in peril from an Atlantic gale, instinctively prayed to a God whose existence he had denied. There is probably not one of my readers who has not occasionally prayed, or at some period thought it right to pray; he has found it difficult to disbelieve in prayer.

If these facts are true it follows that the unbeliever in prayer contravenes the universal instinct, considers himself superior to the wisest and holiest of the race, modestly regards all men as wrong except himself; believes the world for sixty centuries to have been in grave error, and the noblest and best of men to have been, through all ages, the victims of a puerile superstition which it has remained for him, a babe of yesterday, to explode.

Secondly. It is objected that prayer is presumptuous. Pointing to the magnitude of the divine empire, and the insignificance of the human unit, the unbeliever alleges that it were presumptuous to suppose that prayer can receive any attention; that Deity acts by universal laws whereby the interest of the unit is bound up with the welfare of the universe; that the cries and prayers of that unit can have no more effect on the proceedings of the Infinite One than the mote floating in the sunbeam; and that the attempt of the unit to reach the

Divine ear is as vain and foolish as the attempt to pluck the stars. The answer of scripture need not be cited, nor would the unbeliever acknowledge its force. But if scripture had been silent, the presumptuousness of prayer could not be sustained. As the objector admits the creation of all things, the vast and the minute, the distant and the near, angels and men, the constellations of heaven and the "small dust of the balance," he must explain how it can derogate from the divine dignity to govern and preserve what it was not beneath that dignity to create. The insect, the worm, the blade of grass, are objects of creative skill which transcend the powers of men and angels, and fill both with wonder. He "feeds the ravens," and does not forget the sparrow, still less man, because they are all "His handywork." Nor can we conceive it possible to attend to the whole without regard to the parts. The supervision of a machine includes all the details of its construction; the government of an empire embraces every province, and extends to every subject. It is the character of great minds to be as mindful of details as of generalities. In the government of God the sparrow is as much provided for as the eagle, the fall of a leaf as the rolling of an orb. The difficulty which this would occasion to a creature mind applies not to Him who "fainteth not, neither is weary," and of whose "understanding" "there is no searching." Our notions of effort and labour do not, any more than our ideas of magnitude and duration, apply to the Supreme. To deny, then, that He taketh notice of every object, however insignificant, is to deny His infinite intelligence and power. All the laws and processes of nature,. and all forms of existence, are developments and offshoots of the one. mighty and intelligent life whose origin is God. In such circumstances wherein is prayer presumptuous? It

recognizes that dependence on God which is a fact which no philosophy can disprove. For a conscious agent devoutly to confess that dependence, and humbly to bow to the divine arrangements and to seek the divine guidance, is only becoming and reasonable. Thus far it were presumptuous not to pray. Living as man lives on the divine bounty, exposed to chances and dangers which are within the scope of the divine government, and surrounded with the beauty and magnificence of nature, to have our hearts uplifted in trust and adoration to the infinite benefactor, must be an attitude seemly and right for every creature. If it be reasonable for a child to be thankful to its parent, it is reasonable for a man to acknowledge God. To forget Him, to be unthankful to Him, not to confess our dependence on Him, were presumption indeed; it were to claim independence of His authority, and to throw back His benefits into His face. For myriads of dependent men to cry to "the God in whose hand their breath is and whose are all their ways," "Give us this day our daily bread," is as beautiful in itself, and must be as acceptable to God as the homage of the seraphim before His throne.

Thirdly. Prayer is not a needless or superfluous act. The objection is that the sentiments and action of the Supreme continue the same whether prayer be offered or neglected; that as prayer cannot impart information to God, for He is omniscient; cannot stimulate His compassion, for His goodness is infinite; and cannot modify His purpose, for He "changeth not," it is at best a useless exercise, and belief in its efficacy is a superstition. It is admitted that prayer cannot act in any of the methods suggested. No believer in prayer expects it so to act. But prayer may nevertheless serve valuable objects connected with ourselves. God may have appointed it as a connecting link between His creatures

and Himself, and it may serve important purposes of which there is no trace in the teachings of nature. As there are mysteries in nature which science cannot solve, there may be facts with regard to prayer of which philosophy cannot judge because beyond its range, facts which may amply vindicate its appointment. A man may not ignore such facts because they are beyond his experience, because he is not able to explain them, or because there is no indication of them in physics. A man may be proficient in physical science, and be profoundly ignorant of the universe of mind.

Believers in Scripture know that God has made prayer His law of blessing, has commanded and invited it. If prayer be required by God it is our duty to obey. If no other utility were apparent it would be valuable as a test of obedience. But if God has enjoined prayer it must occupy some important place in His administration, although the philosopher may fail to discover it. Perhaps if that philosopher became a devout believer in Christ he would discover that place; he would at least have the moral fitness to judge of it which as yet, unhappily, he possesses not. Multitudes of Christian philosophers have discovered the usefulness and necessity of prayer, although they have not reduced it to the precision of a science, or expressed it in mathematical formulæ. As a benefactor may know a man's distress and desire to relieve it and yet expect him to solicit his bounty, as a parent may, for a child's good, require expressions of dependence and gratitude, and as a sovereign may demand that his clemency be implored before he pardon the offender, so there may be reasons which make prayer a beneficent arrangement for us, although it add not to the divine knowledge and change not the divine purpose.

The grounds which make prayer superfluous would, if valid, equally prove labour to be unnecessary, be

cause it interferes with the laws and purposes of God. If it be replied that human labour enters into God's arrangements as a condition of healthful life, the response is that the book of God, which relates to the soul as much as nature to the body, makes prayer equally a condition of healthful spiritual life; and there is no more interference with the divine purpose and proceedings in the one case than in the other. Unless, then, a man relinquishes the Bible he must not abandon prayer, merely because physical science has not registered it among its discoveries. Prayer is older than science. Science cannot pronounce upon its character and claims. It lies beyond the range of telescope and microscope, it submits not to the analysis of the chemist, or the calculus of the mathematician, it occupies a region which unassisted reason must ever fail to penetrate. While human philosophy cannot discover God it of course denies the utility of prayer.

Fourthly. The advantages of prayer are a question of fact to be determined by experience. To ascertain the truth respecting it we should pursue the course adopted in analogous cases, viz., consult those who have tested prayer, and candidly sift their evidence. The men who have not tested prayer for themselves are not judges in this case, and their philosophical objections are powerless against established facts. If we would know the truth of any branch of science we consult those who have most earnestly prosecuted it; and if we would ascertain the truth of an occurrence we examine those who witnessed it. True philosophy, therefore, requires us to hear the testimony of men who have been most earnest in prayer, and to accept their testimony as that of honest witnesses who have no object to serve but the common good. We need not adduce instances of answered prayer, it is sufficient to

say that all good men have prayed and confessed that they have derived from prayer the most blessed results. The uniformity of the habit can only be explained by some uniformity of advantage. Prayer seems essential to their spiritual life as nutriment to the body, and their whole conduct bears silent witness to the blessedness of the habit. The testimony of those who have tested prayer cannot be impugned or weakened by any allegations of those who have made no trial of its worth. We accept the testimony of an experience so wide and uniform as meets us in this instance as decisive of the question with every true philosopher. Prayer has ever been the great moral elevator of man. It has made the best, truest, noblest men which the world has seen. It has filled them with blessedness, preserved them in divine purity, raised life with them into a divine service, sustained them under the direst calamities, and solaced them in death with an immortal

hope. Prayer has brought God into the whole sphere of a mundane life, and raised man into moral affinity with God. The philosopher may not reject the testimony of "men of prayer" until he has himself become an humble believer in Christ, and is thus morally able to investigate the subject by the light of his own experience.

If the objector still urges the profitlessness of prayer, it is fair to enquire "what profit" he has found in neglecting it. Is he happier and better for the neglect? Is his life nobler, his spirit purer? Are his

aims more generous, noble, Godlike? Will any good come from neglecting prayer, any good for this life, any good for eternity? The lover of prayer by his own testimony reaps inestimable advantages, while the objector to prayer by his own confession derives no benefit from the neglect; and he will owe it to the infinite mercy if he does not suffer through that neglect an unutterable loss.

WHEN visiting a sick man a short time ago, I asked for a Bible to read from, and he told me that when a lad at Sunday school his teacher had given him "a Bible with a clasp." The words did not strike me until the dusty unused volume was handed to me, and they then acquired a new and painful meaning. I saw that, like so many other people, he had fastened his Bible with a strong clasp indeed. And as I walked home I could not help musing on the words I had heard a Bible with a clasp ! How many people have only such an one! You, dear reader, who open that little thick book that lies on your dressing table ere you retire to rest each night, and then again in the morning store your

memory with its gracious promises and gentle precepts; or if you are the head of a family, gather your household together and at least begin the day with its hallowing words, you will not think that I am talking at you, for your copy has no clasp to it of the kind I am referring to; but other peoples' Bibles are too frequently closed and silent for years.

On some Bibles there is the clasp of Indifference, which shuts them to as effectually as if it were a great stone rolled over them which no might could move. I have known persons keep God's word under lock and key as though it were some costly jewel or piece of plate only to be brought out on special occasions. And we know it is indeed a treasure