On Prayer 1.1–5.6

Things that, because they are very great and beyond man and far above our perishable nature, are impossible for the rational and mortal race to grasp, become possible by the will of God through the great and immeasurable grace of God poured out from God upon men, through Jesus Christ, the minister of his unsurpassable grace toward us, and through the Spirit who works with him. The acquisition of wisdom, for example, by which all things were fashioned (for, according to David, God made “all things in wisdom”), though impossible for human nature, becomes possible instead of impossible through our Lord Jesus Christ, “who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption.” “For what man will know the counsel of God? Or who will conceive what the Lord wills? For the reasonings of mortals are timid, and our designs are likely to fail; for a corruptible body weighs down the soul, and the earthly tent burdens the thoughtful mind. And we can hardly guess at what is on earth; but who has traced out what is in the heavens?” Who would not say that it is impossible for a man to trace out “what is in the heavens”? Yet this impossibility becomes possible by the surpassing grace of God; for he who was caught up to the third heaven perhaps traced out what is in the three heavens, since he heard “inexpressible words, which it is not permitted for a man to speak.” And who can say that it is possible for a man to know the mind of the Lord? But this too God grants through Christ … the will of their lord, no longer, when he teaches them the will of the Lord, since he no longer wishes to be lord but changes into a friend to those whose lord he formerly was. But also, just as no one “among men knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man that is in him, so also no one” knows “the things of God except the Spirit of God.” And if no one “knows” “the things of God” “except the Spirit of God,” it is impossible for a man to know “the things of God.” But consider how this too becomes possible: “But we,” he says, “have received not the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God; and we speak of these not in words taught by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit.”

But it is likely, most God-fearing and most industrious Ambrose, and most modest and most courageous Tatiana (from whom I pray that “the ways of women” have already ceased, as they had ceased for Sarah), that you are wondering why, when our subject is prayer, these things were said in the preface about things impossible for men becoming possible by the grace of God. I am persuaded that one of the things impossible, as far as our weakness goes, is to set out clearly, accurately, and in a manner worthy of God, the whole account of prayer: how one ought to pray, what one ought to say to God in prayer, and which times are more suitable than others for prayer … the one who, because of the surpassing greatness “of the revelations,” took care “that no one” should “think of” him “more than he sees” “or hears from” him, confesses that he does not know how to pray “as we ought”; for what we ought to pray, he says, “as we ought, we do not know.” And it is necessary not only to pray, but to pray “as we ought,” and to pray for what we ought. For even if we are able to grasp what we ought to pray for, this is deficient unless we add also “as we ought.” And what use to us is “as we ought,” if we do not know how to pray for what we ought?

Of these two, then, the one—I mean “what we ought”—is the words of the prayer, while “as we ought” is the disposition of the one who prays. For example, of “what we ought”: “Ask for the great things, and the small will be added to you,” and, “Ask for the heavenly things, and the earthly will be added to you,” and, “Pray for those who mistreat you,” and, “Pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest,” and, “Pray that you may not enter into temptation,” and, “Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a sabbath,” and, “When you pray, do not babble,” and whatever is similar to these. Of “as we ought”: “I wish, then, that the men pray in every place, lifting up holy hands without anger or dispute; likewise also that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with reverence and self-control, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, as befits women who profess godliness, with good works.” Instructive of “as we ought” is also this: “So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go, first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.” For what greater gift can be sent up to God by a rational being than the fragrant word of prayer, offered from a conscience that has no foul odor of sin? Again, of “as we ought” is this: “Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again, so that Satan may not rejoice over you because of your lack of self-control.” For by these things “as we ought” is hindered, unless the act of the mysteries of marriage, which deserve to be passed over in silence, is performed with more dignity, more deliberation, and less passion; the “agreement” here spoken of removing the discord of passion, consuming the lack of self-control, and preventing Satan's malicious rejoicing. Besides these, instructive of “as we ought” is this: “Whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone”; and the saying in Paul, “Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, but every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head,” sets forth “as we ought.”

But Paul, knowing all these things and able to set out many times more from the law and the prophets and the fullness of the gospel, with a varied exposition of each, speaks from a disposition that is not only modest but also truthful (seeing, even after all these things, how far he falls short of knowing what we ought to pray for “as we ought”), and says: “what we ought to pray for as we ought, we do not know”; and to this statement he adds the following. From this, what is lacking is supplied to one who does not know, but has made himself worthy to have what is lacking supplied in him. For he says: “The Spirit himself intercedes exceedingly with God with groanings too deep for words; and he who searches the hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because he intercedes for the saints according to God.” And the Spirit, who cries “Abba, Father” in the hearts of the blessed, knowing carefully the groanings of those in the tent, groanings fit to weigh down those who have fallen or transgressed, “intercedes exceedingly with God with groanings too deep for words,” taking our groanings upon himself through his great love for mankind and compassion. And by the wisdom that is in him, seeing our soul humbled “to the dust” and shut up in the body “of humiliation,” he “intercedes exceedingly with God,” using not ordinary “groanings” but ones “too deep for words,” akin to the inexpressible words which it is not permitted for a man to speak. This Spirit, not content with interceding with God, intensifies his intercession and “intercedes exceedingly”—I think for those who are more than conquerors, as Paul was, who says, “But in all these things we are more than conquerors.” And it is likely that he only “intercedes” for those who are not so great as to be more than conquerors, nor again such as to be conquered, but who conquer.

Connected with “what we ought to pray for as we ought, we do not know, but the Spirit intercedes exceedingly with God with groanings too deep for words” is the saying, “I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the mind also.” For our mind cannot pray unless the Spirit prays before it, as it were within its hearing, just as it cannot sing and hymn the Father in Christ with good rhythm, melody, measure, and harmony unless “the Spirit” who searches “all things, even the depths of God,” first praises and hymns him whose “depths” he has searched and, as far as he was able, grasped. And I think that one of Jesus' disciples, perceiving the weakness of human nature, which falls short of the way one ought to pray, and knowing this especially when he heard the wise and great words spoken by the Savior in his prayer to the Father, said to the Lord when he had ceased praying: “Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples.” The whole sequence of the passage runs thus: “And it came to pass, as he was praying in a certain place, when he ceased, one of his disciples said to him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples to pray” … For did a man brought up in the instruction of the law and the hearing of the prophetic words, and not absent from the synagogues, not know how to pray in some way until he saw the Lord praying “in a certain place”? That would be absurd to say. He prayed according to the customs of the Jews, but he saw that he needed greater knowledge on the subject of prayer. And what was John “teaching his disciples” about prayer, when they came to him to be baptized from Jerusalem and all Judea and the surrounding region, unless as one “more than a prophet” he saw certain things about prayer, which he probably handed on in secret not to all who were baptized but to those who were being made disciples for baptism?

Such prayers, truly spiritual, when the Spirit was praying in the heart of the saints, were written down, full of secret and wonderful doctrines. In the first book of Kingdoms there is, in part, the prayer of Hannah (for the whole of it, “when she continued praying before the Lord,” speaking “in her heart,” was not … in writing); in the Psalms the sixteenth psalm is entitled “A prayer of David,” and the eighty-ninth, “A prayer of Moses, the man of God,” and the hundred and first, “A prayer of the poor man, when he is weary and pours out his supplication before the Lord.” These prayers, since they were truly prayers, made and spoken in the Spirit, are also filled with the doctrines of the wisdom of God, so that one might say of what they proclaim: “Who is wise, and will understand these things? And discerning, and will know them?”

Since, then, to treat of prayer is so great a task that it needs the Father to enlighten us for this too, and his firstborn Word himself to teach, and the Spirit to work in us so that we may understand and speak worthily of so great a question, I pray as a man (for I do not credit myself with the capacity for prayer), and ask to obtain the Spirit before the discourse on prayer, so that a most complete and spiritual word may be given us, and the prayers recorded in the Gospels may be made clear. So let us now begin our treatise on prayer.

First, then, as far as my observation goes, I find the word euchē used when Jacob, having become a fugitive from the anger of his “brother” Esau, was going away “to Mesopotamia” according to the instructions of Isaac and Rebekah. The wording is this: “And Jacob vowed a vow, saying: If the Lord God will be with me and keep me on this way on which I am going, and give me bread to eat and clothing to put on, and bring me back in safety to my father's house, then the Lord shall be my God, and this stone, which I have set up as a pillar, shall be to me a house of God; and of all that you give me I will give a tenth to you.” …

Here it must be noted that the word euchē (which in many places has a meaning different from proseuchē) was used of one who, with a vow, promises to do certain things if he obtains certain things from God. The word is, however, also applied to what we customarily call prayer; as we have found in Exodus after the plague of frogs, the second in the order of the ten … : “Pharaoh called Moses and Aaron and said to them: Pray for me to the Lord, and let him take away the frogs from me and from my people; and I will let the people go, and they shall sacrifice to the Lord.” And if anyone is reluctant to accept that the word euchē signifies, besides the former meaning, also the customary one, because “pray” is Pharaoh's word, let him note also what follows: “And Moses said to Pharaoh: Appoint me a time when I shall pray for you and for your servants and for your people, to destroy the frogs from you and from your people and from your houses; only in the river shall they remain.”

We have observed that at the gnats, the third plague, neither does Pharaoh ask that prayer be made nor does Moses pray. And at the dog-fly, the fourth, he says, “Pray then for me to the Lord,” when Moses also said, “I will go out from you and pray to God, and the dog-fly will depart from Pharaoh and his servants and his people tomorrow”; and a little after, “And Moses went out from Pharaoh and prayed to God.” Again, at the fifth and sixth plagues, neither did Pharaoh ask that prayer be made nor did Moses pray; but at the seventh, “Pharaoh sent and called Moses and Aaron and said to them: I have sinned this time; the Lord is righteous, and I and my people are ungodly. Pray then to the Lord, and let him cause the voices of God and the hail and the fire to cease”; and a little after, “Moses went out from Pharaoh outside the city and spread out his hands to the Lord, and the voices ceased.” Why it is not said “and he prayed,” as in the former cases, but “he spread out his hands to the Lord,” must be examined more fittingly elsewhere. And at the eighth plague Pharaoh says: “And pray to the Lord your God, and let him take away this death from me. And Moses went out from Pharaoh and prayed to God.”

We have said that in many places the word euchē is not used in the customary sense, as in the case of Jacob; so also in Leviticus: “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them: Whoever vows a vow, such as the value of his soul to the Lord, the value of a male from twenty years old to sixty years old shall be fifty didrachms of silver by the holy shekel”; and in Numbers: “And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them: A man or woman who vows a great vow to consecrate himself in purity to the Lord shall keep himself pure from wine and strong drink,” and the rest about the one called a Nazirite. Then a little after: “And he shall consecrate his head on that day on which he was consecrated to the Lord for the days of the vow.” And again a little after: “This is the law of the one who has vowed: on whatever day he fulfills the days of his vow”; and again a little after: “And after this the one who has vowed shall drink wine. This is the law of the one who has vowed, whoever vows to the Lord his gift for his vow, besides whatever his hand can afford, according to the power of the vow which he vows, according to the law of purity.” And near the end of Numbers: “And Moses spoke to the rulers of the tribes of the sons of Israel, saying: This is the word which the Lord has commanded: A man who vows a vow to the Lord, or swears an oath with a binding, or binds himself concerning his soul, shall not profane his word; he shall do all that comes out of his mouth. And if a woman vows a vow to the Lord, or binds herself with a binding in her father's house in her youth, and her father hears her vows and her bindings with which she bound herself upon her soul, and her father keeps silent, all her vows shall stand, and all the bindings with which she bound herself upon her soul shall remain for her”; and next to these he legislates certain things about such a woman. In this sense it is written in Proverbs … : “It is a snare for a man hastily to consecrate some of his own; for after vowing comes repentance”; and in Ecclesiastes: “It is better not to vow than to vow and not pay”; and in the Acts of the Apostles: “We have four men who have a vow on them.”

It seemed to me not unreasonable first to distinguish the meaning according to the Scriptures, since euchē has two meanings, and likewise proseuchē. For this word too, besides the common and customary sense in which it is used in many places, is also applied in the sense of euchē as we customarily understand it, in what is said about Hannah in the first book of Kingdoms: “And Eli the priest sat on a seat by the doorposts of the temple of the Lord. And she was bitter of soul, and she prayed to the Lord and wept bitterly. And she vowed a vow and said: O Lord of hosts, if you will indeed look upon the humiliation of your servant and remember me and not forget your servant, and give to your servant a male child, then I will give him to the Lord as one given all the days of his life, and no iron shall come upon his head.”

One could, however, not unpersuasively, attending here to “she prayed to the Lord” and “she vowed a vow,” say that if she did both, that is, “prayed to the Lord” and “vowed a vow,” perhaps “prayed” is used of what we customarily call prayer, while “vowed a vow” is used in the sense found in Leviticus and Numbers. For “I will give him to the Lord as one given all the days of his life, and no iron shall come upon his head” is not properly a prayer but that kind of vow which Jephthah also vowed in these words: “And Jephthah vowed a vow to the Lord and said: If you will indeed deliver the sons of Ammon into my hand, then whoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the sons of Ammon shall be the Lord's, and I will offer him up as a whole burnt offering.”

If, then, after this we must, as you asked, first set out the plausible arguments of those who think that nothing is accomplished by prayers and therefore say that praying is superfluous, we shall not hesitate to do this too as far as we can, using the word “prayer” now in a more general and simple sense … This view is so discreditable, and has found so few notable champions, that there is hardly anyone at all to be found, among those who accept providence and set God over the universe, who does not accept prayer. For the doctrine belongs either to those who are utterly godless and deny the existence of God, or to those who admit God in name only but deprive him of providence. Yet the opposing power, wishing to attach the most impious doctrines to the name of Christ and to the teaching of the Son of God, has already been able to persuade some that one should not pray. The champions of this opinion are those who do away with sensible things altogether and use neither baptism nor the Eucharist, slandering the Scriptures as if they did not mean even this prayer, but taught something else by it.

The arguments of those who set prayers aside (that is, of those who set God over the universe and say there is providence; for it is not our present task to examine what is said by those who do away with God or providence altogether) would be these: “God” knows “all things before they come to be,” and nothing becomes known to him for the first time from its coming to be when it comes to be, as though it were not known before. What need is there, then, to send up a prayer to one who, even before we pray, knows what we need? For “the heavenly Father knows what” we “need before” we “ask him.” And it is reasonable that, being the Father and Creator of the universe, who loves “all things that exist” and abhors nothing he has made, he should arrange everything concerning each one for its salvation even without prayer, like a father who cares for infants and does not wait for their request, since they are either not able to ask at all, or through ignorance often wish to receive the opposite of what is good and profitable for them. And we men fall short of God further than very young children fall short of the mind of their parents.

And it is likely that the things that will be are not only foreknown by God but also preordained, and that nothing happens contrary to what he has preordained. Just as, then, if someone should pray for the sun to rise, he would be thought silly, asking that what will happen even without his prayer should happen through his prayer; so a man would be foolish who thinks that through his own prayer things happen which would in any case happen even if he did not pray. And again, just as a man would surpass all madness who, being troubled and scorched by the sun at the summer solstice, thought that through prayer the sun would be moved to the spring signs, so that he might enjoy temperate air; so if anyone thought that by praying he would not suffer the circumstances that necessarily befall the human race, he would surpass all melancholy madness.

And if “sinners are estranged from the womb,” and the righteous man is set apart “from his mother's womb,” and when “they were not yet born and had done nothing good or bad, so that God's purpose according to election might stand, not from works but from him who calls,” it is said, “The elder will serve the younger,” then we ask in vain for the forgiveness of sins, or to receive a spirit of strength, so that we may be able to do “all things” with Christ strengthening us. For if we are “sinners,” we have been estranged “from the womb”; but if we were set apart “from” our “mother's womb,” the best things will come to us even if we do not pray. For what prayer did Jacob offer before he was born, that it should be prophesied that he would “surpass” Esau and that his brother would “serve” him? And what impiety had “Esau” committed, that he was hated before he was born? And why does Moses pray, as is found in the eighty-ninth psalm, if God is his “refuge” “before the mountains were established and the earth and the world were formed”? …

But also concerning all who will be saved it is written in the Letter to the Ephesians that the Father “chose” them “in him,” “in Christ,” “before the foundation of the world, that” they “should be holy and blameless before him, having predestined” them “in love to adoption as sons through Christ to himself.” Either, then, someone is among those chosen “before the foundation of the world,” and it is impossible for him to fall from his election, so that he has no need of prayer; or he has not been chosen nor predestined, and he prays in vain, and even if he prays ten thousand times, he will not be heard. For “those whom” God “foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image” “of the glory” “of his Son.” “And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified.” Why does Josiah toil, or why in praying is he anxious whether he will be heard or not, when he was prophesied by name many generations before, and not only foreknown as to what he would do but foretold in the hearing of many? And why does Judas pray, so that his prayer becomes “sin,” when from the time of David he had been proclaimed as one who would lose “his office,” another taking it in his place? It is plainly incongruous, since God is unchangeable and has comprehended all things beforehand and abides by what he has preordained, to pray, thinking to change his purpose by one's prayer, or to address him as one who has not preordained but waits for each person's prayer, so that because of the prayer he may ordain what is fitting for the one who prays, then appointing what is judged reasonable, which he had not seen before.

Let me set down here, in its very words, what you laid out in your letter to me, which runs thus: “First: if God foreknows the future, and it must come to pass, prayer is vain. Second: if all things happen according to the will of God, and his counsels are fixed, and none of the things he wills can be changed, prayer is vain.” Useful, I think, for the solution of the difficulties that make people slack in prayer are the following preliminary considerations.