161 
existent before creation. Let me ask him respectfully what it is he means 
by that ? What do we mean by “ light” before an eye was created ? What 
do we mean by “ light,” apart from the communication between the seeing 
eye and the sun ? The Deity does not see in the sense in which we see, and 
does not speak in the sense in which we speak, limited as we are by space 
and time. These limitations are necessary and proper for us ; but if Mr. 
M‘Caul admits, in these days, when science has laid bare the sources of 
language, and all her resources are spread before us, that he is forced to 
express himself within such narrow limits, we cannot blame a doctor of the 
sixteenth century because sometimes he fell short of the dignity of the 
materials he was using, and in endeavouring to put his opinions strongly, 
sometimes put them in a way which make them rub roughly against our 
wider notions now. Then, again, about prayer. No doubt it is a blasphe- 
mous thing for anybody to propose a test of prayer ; but is it not true that 
the supporters of the Christian doctrine of prayer, in these modern times, — 
and I say it in the presence of authorities in theology, who will correct me 
if I am wrong, — adopt an argument in reference to prayer which is something 
quite new in the history of theology ? Is their doctrine of prayer the 
same as that which was accepted by the older Puritans and divines 1 I think 
I am right in saying that the warning against dictatorial prayer is pro- 
bably one of the most frequent subjects of warning among the older divines, 
and I do not know that there is any authority among any of the orthodox 
theologians of our Church, or of any other Reformed Church, for holding that 
the mere expression of a wish, by the creature, is sufficient to change the 
supreme will of the Creator. If we once admitted that, we see plenty of 
opportunities for philosophical and scientific infidels to scoff, for the 
assertion that the expression of such a wish would necessarily change the 
plan of the Creator is full of difficulties, both metaphysical and phy- 
sical, which are too numerous and obvious to need pointing out. Let 
us take one case ; suppose a young man who is an object of deep 
regard to a whole nation is lying at the point of death, prayer is 
publicly offered up, and that young man recovers ; and we say that but for 
these prayers the Almighty would have struck him with death, and bereaved 
the people. Do we mean that ? Suppose it were cruel to take him : do we 
mean to say that but for the accidental upraising of the people’s voice the 
Deity would have been cruel ? Suppose it were kind and wise to take him, 
because the people were impatient and rebelled, the Lord repented ! What 
is the orthodox notion of prayer 1 Is it not that a blessing is given to those 
who humble themselves before the Throne ? Not that their human desires 
and imperfect conceptions are realized ; but that they are enabled to trust 
where they cannot trace, and grace is given to them, in the mean time, to 
bear the dispensation in resignation, with the hope that by-and-by they 
will perchance have light given to them to see how even this was love, not 
an evil, but a good in disguise. Yet I have never seen this view stated in 
any of the recent controversies that have arisen on this subject, though it is 
the most obvious teaching of Calvinism. I said I was disappointed in this 
