167 



The question here arises then, what is the effect on the mind of the 

 receiver ? Simple gladness or satisfaction at the alleviation that had come 

 would not, could not, be the entire result in any case but the first supposed. 

 In none of the other cases would the man have the same feeling. Various 

 shades of feeling, quite distinct from the mechanical result, would show with 

 delicate accuracy the man's inward and personal appreciation of his deliver- 

 ance, in some relation to his deliverance— feelings which he would think it 

 base to disavow, feelings which belong to his own character, and the value of 

 which he would simply be ashamed to think wholly mechanical. On these 

 feelings the man might, or might not, rightly act according to a high 

 standard ; but he would know that he ougJit, and he would not like to think 

 his own volition was in such case " excluded from the economy of nature." 



We shall say no more at present as to the " conception of a moral world," 

 which, we have observed, every one must form before he discourses on the 

 Christian theory and practice of prayer. Enough is suggested, and more is 

 not needed, to show that mechanical, or material causes will not explain all 

 phenomena, and that will, and personal intelligence, have some place in our 

 world. Materialists appeal with confidence at times to Mr. Herbert Spencer 

 as their "thinker." Will Mr. Herbert Spencer's admission that religion is, 

 per se, a fact not to be ignored, satisfy Professor Tyndall ? Or will Max 

 Miiller's painful " Science of Religion ? " Or shall we ask him to ponder a 

 little the words of Mr. Jolm jNIorley, in his recent bopk on Voltaire, as we 

 have seen them quoted : 



" There is an unknown Element at the bottom of the varieties, whether we 

 agree to call that element a Volition of a superior Being, or an undiscovered 

 set of facts in embryology." 



Truer thinkers than the experimentalists can thus conceive a possible place 

 for that " volition," the announcement of which is the announcement of the 

 " moral world," which Christianity and humanity alike assert. 



Then, finally, let us think of Prayer as the act and habit of an Agent who 

 originates thought, will, desire, and who is one of a community of such agents, 

 mutually acting on each other, beneath a moral Supreme Governor, whose 

 rule is inseparable from the conception of a vast Community of such respon- 

 sible agents. (See again " The Analysis of Human Responsibility.") 



As Christians, we derive our notions of prayer from Christ our Master. 

 He has taught us that prayer is the expression of our will, and so discovers 

 our own character. Nothing so truly determines what we are as our real wishes. 

 If we put our wishes into words, they are either petitions to men, or prayers to 

 God. In the latter case, we have to consider that, putting our will into words 

 before our Supreme moral Governor, we are speaking to Him who also has 

 a will as to everything ; and as He is our perfect ruler, we ought to defer 

 to His will in expressing our own. We secure the higher morality of our 

 own acts of will by conforming in detail to the Supreme will. To Christians 

 the ascertamment of that Supreme will is no impossible or unrewarded aim 

 of the faith and the reason ; just as the conscientious ethical effort of any 



