RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Prayer
Prayer -Gage Debate
Prayer, London, 1909 ; Ann Louise Strong, The Psychology of Prayer, Chicago, 1909; Dora Greenwell and P. T. Forsyth, The Power of Prayer, London, 1910; W. A. Cornaby, Let us Pray.' Home Circle Papers on the Science and Art of Supplication, ib. 1910; Vigouroux, Dictionnaire, fascs. xxxii. 663-xxxiii.
Among anthologies may be named: C. H. von Bogatzky, Golden Treasury of Prayer (a classic, latest ed., London, 1904); C. Wolfsgruber, Hortutus animce, Augsburg, 1884; J. F. France, Preces veterum ex operibus sanctorum excerptce, London, 1887; E. Hodder, A Book of Uncommon Prayers, London, 1898; M. W. Tilleston, Great Souls at Prayer; fourteen Centuries of Prayer, London, 1898; Annie de Pene, Les Belles Prieres, Paris, 1909 (anthology of prayers from Christian, Moslem, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, and Shinto sources) .
PRAYER BOOK, ENGLISH. See Common Pbayer, Book of.
PRAYER FOR THE DEAD: A custom which, springing from natural and laudable affection, is 'ound among very diverse peoples. It has a conlection, in thought at least and often in fact, with ;hat variety of sacrifice called vicarious, in which ntercession is believed to be potential for the reease of another from the consequences of that )ther's misdeeds. Its existence among the Jews n the second century before Christ is proved by [I Mace. xii. 43-45, in which passage it is stated ;hat not only prayer but sacrifice for the dead was )ffered by Judas, and the manner of statement shows that the deed was not unusual and was reckmed praiseworthy. But no Old-Testament passage :an be quoted in favor of the custom.
There can be little question that from Judaism ;he practise passed over to the Christian Church. Attempts have been made to justify the custom )y reference to the teaching of Jesus in such paslages as Matt. xii. 32, but such inferences are regarded as strained. A more secure scriptural basis s afforded by the famous passage I Pet. hi. 19-20, sf. iv. 6, which is, however, sometimes brought into i forced connection with Zach. ix. 11. Combined vith the vogue given by Jewish custom and the iffection and hope which reached beyond the grave, his passage gave sanction to the practise in the early Christian Church. Tertullian is the earliest Christian vriter who makes reference to prayers for the dead is customary (De exhortatione castitatis, xi.; De mima, Iviii.; De monogamia, x.; De corona, hi.; Sng. transls. in ANF, vols, iii.-iv.). Similar tesimony is given by Arnobius (Adv. gentes, iv. 36), Jyprian (Ep. i. of Oxford ed., Ixv. in ANF, v. 367), fyril of Jerusalem (Mystagogikai catecheseis, v. § 7), Augustine (" City of God," xxi. 13; De cur a pro nortuis, i. and iv.), Chrysostom (Commentary on i'hil., horn. 3), Dionysius the Areopagite (Hierarchia eclesiastica, last chap.), and Apostolic Constituions, VIII., ii. 12, iv. 41 (where the liturgical form 3 given). By some of these Fathers the custom iras regarded as of apostolic institution. That the iractise was strengthened by the idea of the solilarity of the Church as including the living and the lead is not unlikely, and a lingering influence of the lassical Hades (q.v.) as a sort of middle state may lave had its influence. The general practise of the arly Church is further evinced by mortuary inscripions. In view of all this it is not surprising that he prayer for the dead entered the liturgies, ap- 'earing in those of St. Mark, St. James, the Nes-
torian, Ambrosian, and Gregorian, and the Gallican. The development of the doctrine of Purgatory (q.v.), which in order of time followed the custom, fixed more firmly, if possible, the custom, and there developed in the West the Office (or Mass) for the Dead and the Missa de Sanctis, the former at least as early as the sixth century. The offering of these prayers was from the earliest times particularly connected with the Eucharist. At the Reformation the practise fell into disrepute among Protestants, largely on the initiative of Calvin, and practically the entire Protestant Church rejects the custom. The Book of Common Prayer retains traces of the practise, which has not been expressly prohibited in the Anglican Church, and is indeed followed in certain parts. Geo. W Gilmobe.
Bibliography: Hierurgia Anglicana, pp. 320-324, London, 1848 (gives examples of mortuary inscriptions containing prayers for the dead); J. H. Blunt, Dictionary of Doctrinal and Historical Theology, pp. 585-586, ib. 1870; F. G. Lee, The Christian Doctrine of Prayer for the Departed, ib. 1875; H. M. Luckock, After Death, ib. 1881; E. H. Plumptre, Spirits in Prison, New York, 1885; A. J. Anderson, Is it Right to Pray for the Dead ? London, 1889; H. T. D., The Faithful Dead. Shall we pray for them f ib. 1896; E. T. d'E. Jesse, Prayers for the Departed, ib. 1900; C. H. H. Wright, The Intermediate State and Prayers for the Dead, ib. 1900; H. Falloon, The Blessed Dead: do they need our Prayers? ib. 1905; D. Stone, The Invocation o Saints, new ed., ib. 1910 (favors the practise); DC A, i. 267-274, ii. 1202-03, 1437-38.
PRAYER-GAGE DEBATE, THE: A controversy evoked by an unsigned communication by Prof. John Tyndall in the Contemporary Review, July, 1872 (" The ' Prayer for the Sick.' Hints toward a Serious Attempt to Estimate its Value," vol. xx. 205-210). The article proposed that " one single ward or hospital, under the care of first-rate physicians and surgeons, containing certain numbers of patients afflicted with diseases which have been best studied, and of which the mortality rates are the best known, whether the diseases are those which are treated by medical or surgical remedies, should be, during a period of not less, say, than three or five years, made the object of special prayers by the whole body of the faithful, and that, at the end of this time, the mortality rates should be compared with those of other leading hospitals, similarly well managed, during the same period. Granting that time is given and numbers are sufficiently large, so as to insure a minimum of error from accidental disturbing causes the experiment will be exhaustive and complete." This was replied to by Richard Frederick Littledale (ib., pp. 430^54) who, while acknowledging the probability that prayer belongs to a region of law which permits inquiry concerning its practical operations, objected to the scheme, that it was impracticable, and that we can not quantify prayer. Professor Tyndall (ib., pp. 763-766), in a rej oinder, asks for restoration of prayer to its rightful domain and for verification. The author of the proposal (ib., pp. 766-777) cites as reasons why his suggestion was not complied with, inadequate conceptions respecting prayer and God's relations with his creatures. The discussion was continued by James McCosh, William Knight, the duke of Argyll (ib., pp. 777-782, vol. XXL, pp. 183-198,
Prayer, Sours or Preaching