There is one passage of Scripture, however, that ap- pears to have escaped the general attention of writers and speakers on this topic, but which is. as it seems to us, peculiarly apposite, if not conclusive of the whole ground of controversy. It is as follows in the ordinary English version : "The effectual fervent, prayer of a righteous man availeth much" (James v, 16). The con- text shows that this language bears most appropriately on the points we have been discussing. The apostle had just been speaking of the prayer of the united Church on behalf of the sick, assuring them that these would be efficacious ; and he goes on immediately to speak of the miracle-working prayers of Elias, taking care to observe that this noted prophet was after all only ': a man subject to like passions as we are," and hence obviously inferring that prayer was still as avail- able as it had been in his case. Unfortunately the com- mon rendering of the passage as above has confused, if not wholly perverted, its real meaning. As it now stands, it contains a palpable tautology, for "effectual prayer," of course, " availeth much." and the epithet " fervent" likewise thus becomes superfluous, as well as the qualification "of a righteous man." The single Greek word translated by "effectual fervent" (svepyov- uivoc) literally means inwrought. The only question among interpreters is whether it may not be reflexive (middle voice), and thus signify inworking itself, that is, operative or effective. This was evidently the view of our authorized translators, and they have been fol- lowed I iv many scholars, including Robinson (Lexicon of the N. T.) and Ali'ord (Greek Test. .), the latter of whom renders the passage after the order of the Greek words, '-The supplication of the righteous man availeth much in its working," that is, as he explains it from Huther, " The prayer of the righteous can do much in its energy." But this leaves the tautology about the same. Lange's note (Commentary, ad loc), after re- viewing the other instances of the use of the word in the N. T., approaches the true idea, "The full tension of the praying spirit under its absolute yielding to the di- vine impulse;" but Mombert's gloss (in the American edition), " Absolute submission to the will of God," com- pletely neutralizes its meaning. The passive sense of the participle is required by its grammatical form, and is justified by every passage where this form occurs: e. g. sinful passions are inwrought (Rom. vii, 5) ; salva- tion is inwrought by endurance (2 Cor. i, 6); death is inwrought (2 Cor. iv, 12) ; faith is inwrought by love (Gal. v, 6) ; God's power is inwrought (Eph. iii, 20, pre- cisely parallel with our text, as also in Col. i, 29), and similarly his word (1 Thess. ii, 13), and on the other hand the "mystery of iniquity" (2 Thess. ii, 7). The thought of the apostle James, therefore, is, as Michaelis (after the Greek fathers) interprets, that the saint's prayer prevails when its earnestness is divinely inspired. To this sense the illustration of Elijah is most apt. as we may see by referring especially to the history alluded to (1 Kings xviii, 42-45). The scene is graphically described by Stanley (Lectures on Jewish History, 2d series, p. 337, Amer. ed.), but as usual he misses the
spiritual import. The seven-times bent form of the prophet, with his head between his knees, was not mere- ly "the Oriental attitude of entire abstraction;" it de- noted the intense struggle of his soul after the boon which Jehovah inwardly urged him to crave. It was an agony of prayer that would not be denied, similar, though less exhaustive, to that of our Saviour in the garden, which we learn (Heb. v, 7) was effectual as to its main object (Luke xxii, 43). Another example of the same energized prayer for which Elijah is adduced by the apostle occurs earlier in the account of the rais- ing to life of the son of the widow of Zerephath, where the praying prophet "stretched himself upon the child three times" (1 Kings xvii, 21), as if he would infuse his own ardent soul into the lifeless form (compare the more detailed narrative in the parallel case ofElishaand the Shunammite's son, 2 Kings iv, 34). He has bad a very shallow experience of " the deep things of God" (2 Cor. iii, 10, the passage having reference to this very point ) who has not felt "the Spirit itself making inter- cession with groanings which cannot be uttered" (Rom. \ iii. 26). At such times the veil between the natural and the miraculous becomes thin indeed. See Cocker, Theism (N. Y. 187G, 12mo); Dawson, Nature and the Bible, p. 59, 00" ; Farrar, Crit. Hist, of Free Thought, p. 395; Blackwood's Magazine, June, 1867, p. 080; Meth. Quar. Rev. Oct. 1854, p. 526; New-Evglander, ( >ct. 1873, art. i ; Ch. Monthly, June, 1866, p. 330 : Lond. Quar. Rev. Oct. 1854, p. 32; Presb. Rev. April, 1870; Bapt. Quar. Oct. 1873, art. iv ; Brit, and For. /■>. Quar. Rev. Oct. 1873, art. iii; Theol. Medium, Jan. 1874, art. iii; Bibl. Sacra, Jan. 1870, p. 199; Jan. 1875, art. v; Contemp. Rev. July, Aug., Oct. 1872; South. Qua,: Rev. April, 1875, art. iv. Comp. Miracle.