Chapter IV.
15. But now we have to consider what things we are taught to pray for by Him through whom we both learn what we are to pray for, and obtain what we pray for. “After this manner, therefore, pray ye,”267
| 267 Orate; Vulgate, Orabitis.
|
says He: “Our
Father who art in
heaven,
Hallowed be Thy name. Thy
kingdom come. Thy will be done on
earth, as it is in
heaven. Give us this day our
daily268
| 268 Quotidianum; Vulgate, supersubstantialem.
|
bread. And
forgive us our
debts, as we
forgive our
debtors. And bring
269
| 269 Inferas (Rev. Vers.); Vulgate, inducas.
|
us not into
temptation, but
deliver us from
evil.”
270
| 270 This prayer is called the Lord’s Prayer because our Lord is its author, He did not and could not have used it Himself, on account of (1) the special meaning of the pronoun “our” in the address, (2) the confession of sins in the fifth petition. Luke’s account (xi. 1) agrees in the subject of the petitions as in the address, but differs (1) in the omission of the third petition (Crit text); (2) in the addition to the fifth petition (which, however, Matthew
gives at the close of the prayer in a more elaborate form); (3) in adducing a request of the disciples as the occasion of the prayer. Some have thought the prayer was given on two occasions (Meyer in earlier edd., Tholuck). Others hold that Matthew has inserted it out of its proper historical place (Neander, Olshausen, De Wette, Ebrard, Meyer in ed. vi., Weiss, etc.). This question of priority and accuracy as between the forms of Matthew and Luke may be regarded as set at rest by the
Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, which (viii. 2) gives the exact form of Matthew with three unimportant differences: viz. (1) heaven, οὐρανῷ, instead of heavens; (2) the omission of the article before earth; (3) debt instead of debts. This document contains the doxology (with the omission of kingdom), and supports the Textus Receptus in giving the present, we forgive,
ἀφίεμεν, instead of the perfect, we have forgiven, ἀφῆκαμεν.—The division of the prayer is usually made into (1) address, (2) petitions, (3) doxology (omitted from the approved critical Greek text and the Revised Version).—The petitions are seven according to Augustin, Luther, Bengel, Tholuck, etc: six (the two last being combined as one)
according to Chrysostom, Reformed catechisms, Calvin, Schaff, etc. The petitions are divided into two groups (Tertullian) or tables (Calvin).—The contents of the first three petitions concern the glory of God; of the last four, the wants of men. In the first group the pronoun is thy, and the direction of the thought is from heaven downwards to earth; in the second group it is us, and the direction of the thought is from earth upwards to God.—The numbers, in view of
their significance in the Old Testament, 3, 4, 7, are not an uninteresting item. Tholuck says: “The attention of the student who has otherwise heard of the doctrine of the Trinity will find a distinct reference to it in the arrangement of this prayer. In the first petition of each group, God is referred to as Creator and Preserver; in the second as Redeemer; in the third as the Holy Spirit.”—The Lord’s Prayer is more than a specimen of prayer: it is a pattern. Different views are held
concerning its liturgical use, which can be traced back to Cyprian and Tertullian, and now farther still, to the Teaching of the Apostles, which, after giving the prayer, says, “Thrice a day pray thus.” It also gives (ix.) a form of prayer to be used after the Eucharist. Of its abuse Luther says, “It is the greatest martyr.”—It is not a compilation, although similar or the same, petitions may have been in use among the Jews. The simplicity, symmetry of arrangement,
depth and progress of thought, reverence of feeling, make it, indeed, the model prayer,—the Lord’s Prayer. Tertullian calls it breviarium totius evangelii (so Meyer).
|
Seeing that in all prayer we have to conciliate the goodwill of him to whom we
pray, then to say what we
pray for; goodwill is usually conciliated by our offering
praise to him to whom the prayer is directed, and this is usually put in the beginning of the prayer: and in this particular our
Lord has bidden us say nothing else but “Our
Father who art in
heaven.” For many things are said in
praise of
God, which, being scattered variously and widely over all the Holy
Scriptures, every one will be able to consider when he reads them: yet nowhere is there found a
precept for the people of
Israel, that they should say “Our
Father,” or that they should
pray to
God as a
Father; but as
Lord He was made known to them, as being yet
servants,
i.e. still living according to the
flesh. I say this, however, inasmuch as they received the commands of the
law, which they were ordered to observe: for the
prophets often show that this
same
Lord of ours might have been their
Father also, if they had not strayed from His
commandments: as, for instance, we have that statement, “I have nourished and brought up
children, and they have rebelled against me;”
271
and that other, “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are
children of the Most High;”
272
and this again, “If then I be a
Father, where is mine honour? and if I be a Master, where is my
fear?”
273
and very many other statements, where the
Jews are
accused of showing by their
sin that they did not wish to become sons: those things being left out of account which are said in
prophecy of a future
Christian people, that they would have
God as a
Father, according to that
gospel statement, “To them gave He
power to become the sons of
God.”
274
The
Apostle Paul, again, says, “The heir, as long as he is a
child, differeth nothing from a
servant;” and mentions that we have received the Spirit of
adoption, “whereby we
cry,
Abba,
Father.”
275
16. And since the fact that we are called to an eternal inheritance, that we might be fellow-heirs with Christ and attain to the adoption of sons, is not of our deserts, but of God’s grace; we put this very same grace in the beginning of our prayer, when we say “Our Father.” And by that appellation both love is stirred up—for what ought to be dearer to sons than a father?—and a suppliant disposition, when men say to God, “Our Father:” and a certain
presumption of obtaining what we are about to ask; since, before we ask anything, we have received so great a gift as to be allowed to call God “Our Father.”276
| 276 Patrem quisquis appellare potest, omnia orare potest (Bengel).
|
For what would He not now give to sons when they ask, when He has already granted this very thing, namely, that they might be sons? Lastly, how great solicitude takes hold of the
mind, that he who says “Our
Father,” should not
prove unworthy of so great a
Father! For if any plebeian should be permitted by the party himself to call a senator of more advanced age
father; without doubt he would tremble, and would not readily venture to do it, reflecting on the
humbleness of
his origin, and the scantiness of his resources, and the worthlessness of his plebeian person: how much more, therefore, ought we to tremble to call
God Father, if there is so great a stain and so much baseness in our character, that
God might much more justly drive forth these from contact with Himself, than that senator might the
poverty of any
beggar whatever! Since, indeed, he (the senator) despises that in the
beggar to which even he himself may be reduced by the vicissitude of human
affairs: but
God never falls into baseness of character. And thanks be to the
mercy of Him who requires this of us, that He should be our
Father,—a relationship which can be brought about by no expenditure of ours, but solely by
God’s goodwill. Here also there is an admonition to the
rich and to those of
noble birth, so
far as this
world is concerned, that when they have become
Christians they should not comport themselves proudly towards the
poor and the low of birth; since together with
them they call God “Our Father,”—an expression which they cannot truly and piously use, unless they recognise that they themselves are brethren.
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
