"Here was man, of a darker skin than mine, surrounded by a score of thoughtless, perhaps profane, companions, deprived, by his constant duties in the house, of the enjoy ment of religious privileges; and, yet, with a soul washed in the blood of Jesus, and longing for sympathy with some other soul that had been cleansed in the same fountain. He observes a stranger, at the table which he serves, acknowledging with gratitude the Giver of the bounties before him, and he marks the stranger at once as a Christian, a friend, a brother; and he goes to him with confidence to lay open his heart."

Let the Christian learn from this incident that he is often watched when he little suspects it; and may accomplish much good by a faithful and punctilious attention to the duties of his profession.

JAMES.

THE EFFICACY OF EARNEST, ENERGETIC PRAYER.

The effectual, fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.-James v. 16.

THERE is, in this passage and the context, apparently much to encourage our belief in the efficacy of fervent and sincere prayer. But it is apprehended that a degree of doubt is often experienced in contemplating it, as encouraging such a conviction, from the fact that it seems to express only a self-evident proposition, viz: the effectual prayer of a righteous man is effectual. The propriety of such an interpretation of a passage, in an inspired volume, may well be questioned: hence, on referring to the original, we find the word rendered effectual, to be a derivative from a verb, signifying to labor hard, or energize; and the idea is, "that the earnest, energetic prayer of a righteous man availeth much, or has

great efficacy." This interpretation is sanctioned by Bloomfield and others; and, doubtless, conveys the true import of the passage. And in this view, it has, it must be conceded, great force.

The prayer here contemplated, besides being offered-as all prevalent prayer must be-in reliance upon the merits of Jesus Christ, and in submission to the divine will, must, also, be offered by "a righteous man:" not one righteous in the absolute sense-for no one is perfectly holy-but by one who is truly pious-a sincere lover of God. And, moreover, it must be earnest, energetic prayer, or intensely fervent. Such prayer is declared to avail much, or to have great efficacy.

Prayer involves the idea of want on the part of the suppliant, and supposes ability to supply that want on the part of him to whom the prayer is addressed. "It is the preferring of a request upon the one side, and compliance with that request on the other. Man applies: God complies. Man asks a favor: God bestows it." Here is an antecedent, which is prayer, and a consequent, viz: "The fulfillment of that prayer, in virtue of a mandate from heaven."

And, moreover, prayer proceeds upon the ground of a real influence, or motive-power, upon the being to whom it is addressed. The child asks a favor of a parent; and, by so doing, aims and expects to move the parent to grant it. And he does move him. Without that prayer, he would not, in a supposable case, receive the favor desired. And, moreover, the very importunity of the child, or his earnest, energetic manner, may be the influential cause wherefore the parent bestows it. Man asks a blessing of God; and the object of his asking is to move or influence God to bestow it. And he does move him. "We hold," says Dr. Chalmers, "that there is, in prayer, a real interchange between earth and heaven; and that, for the requests of faith and piety, which ascend from the habitations of men below, there do come down actual returns from the upper sanctuary. The asking,

upon the one side, is met by a consent, and so a giving, or performance, upon the other."

It has been said, indeed, that the only object of prayer is "to discipline the affections ;" and so to prepare the mind to receive and appreciate the blessing sought. But this is not true. For, if prayer be designed only to influence the heart of him who prays, why did Christ spend whole nights in prayer? "Being perfect, he required no discipline of the heart. He had no dross to consume, by holding converse with the divine mind." But, for the full and perfect discharge of the solemn and responsible duties assigned him, he needed the aid of the Father; and, by prayer, he sought to influence the Father to bestow that aid. And he did so influence him. Nor is there any reason to suppose that, without such prayer on the part of Christ, the requisite aid would have been bestowed by the Father. "If there be not a suasion, or actual influence, exerted by prayer, then, indeed," as Dr. Chalmers remarks, "does there lie a hopeless and impassable barrier between us and Him who is called the Father of our spirits."

On an appeal to the Scriptures, are not these views sustained? Abraham intercedes for Lot; and we read: "And God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when he overthrew the cities of the plain." God remembered Abraham's prayer, or intercession for Lot; and, by that prayer, was moved, or influenced, to send Lot out. God said to Moses, in reference to the children, of Israel, who had murmured and rebelled: "Let me alone, that I may destroy this people." "If you pray for them, my hands are tied," as an old divine says: "I shall not be able to destroy them." And again, in reference to the same people, God says: "Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet could not my mind be towards this people :" i. e. they could not influence me to bless them. What is the import of these passages, if prayer has no power over God to influ

ence him? Moreover, what doctrine did our Savior design to inculcate on this point, when he uttered the parable of the unjust judge? The judge, a wicked and unjust man, was moved by importunity; he was influenced to avenge the cause of the widow, because she continued to pray. The friend applied to for bread, (Luke 11,) rose, and gave to his friend, because the latter continued to plead. And this is the true import, or designed inculcation, of the passage: "The earnest, energetic prayer of a righteous man has great efficacy;" it has strong influence; it is a cause, operating upon and powerfully inclining the divine mind to grant the request. To the efficacy of specific prayer, an objection has been made, on the ground of the "unalterable constancy of nature." To this, it may be replied, that, granting the truth of the Scripture history, the laws of nature have, in past ages, been suspended, or reversed, in numerous instances, in answer to prayer. The apostle James cites an instance that of Elijah-in connection with the passage we are contemplating, in proof that the earnest, energetic prayer of a righteous man has great efficacy. In answer to the prayer of that distinguished prophet, it rained not on a portion of the earth for the space of several years.

But the inquiry is both natural and proper.-Is miraculous interposition to be expected, in answer to prayer, at the present day? We cannot say, with positive assurance, that such interposition never occurs. But the presumption is, that nature proceeds in one invariable order; insomuch that the same antecedents are followed by the same consequents. And this has probably been true since the beginning of the creation, saving the well-accredited miracles of the Jewish and Christian dispensations. "We admit," says Dr. Chalmers, "that never, in our whole lives, have we witnessed, as the effect of man's prayer, any infringement made on the known laws of the universe; or that nature, by receding from her constancy, to the extent that we have discovered

it, has ever, in one instance, yielded to his supplicating cry. We admit, that, by no importunity from the voice of faith, or from any number or combination of voices, have we seen an arrest, or a shift, laid on the ascertained courses, whether of the material or the mental economy; or a single fulfillment, of any sort, brought about in contravention either to the known properties of any known substances, or to the known principles of any established succession in the history of nature. These are our experiences."

But, if so, what encouragement have we to pray for blessings which involve, or seem to involve, a supernatural interposition? For instance, suppose a valued friend is sick, and apparently sinking to the grave: May I pray for the special interposition of God? May I pray that skill may be imparted to the physician? May I ask God to direct to such remedies as he will bless?-that he will give efficacy to the means of cure employed? Such prayers are offered. But, if the laws of nature are unchangeable—if God never specially interposes-of what avail is such prayer?

Take another case: A widow, standing on the shore, sees a vessel-on board of which is her only son, and her chief earthly dependence-on the point of foundering. Without the special interposition of God, there is no prospect that she can long survive. Now, has that widow-whom we suppose to be a true child of God-any good reason to believe that her Heavenly Father will answer her cry, made in this day of her trouble? He has said: "Call upon me in the day of trouble, and I will answer thee, and thou shalt glorify me." But, if the laws of nature hold on with a uniform and undeviating constancy, that vessel cannot survive. Suppose the lone widow, in the midst of her agony, is told, by some cold, philosophic objector, that the laws of nature never change. Would this satisfy her? Would this prevent her cries to the Lord of winds and waves? Cry she must, and cry she would.