persecution, and a soul surrounded by temptations, stand equally in the
place of the poor widow; they are in need and in danger. They have no
resources in themselves; help must come from one that is mighty. It is
their interest to plead with him who has all power in heaven and in
earth,--to plead as men plead for life.

The lesson here is very specific; it bears on one point, and in order
that all its force may be concentrated on one point, others are for the
time omitted. This parable is not spoken with the view of teaching that
Christians ought to pray; that duty is assumed here, not enjoined.
Neither does it prescribe what the suppliant should ask, or on whose
merits he should lean. Taking for granted all these things which the
Scriptures elsewhere explicitly teach, the Master in this lesson
confines his attention to one thing,--perseverance in prayer when the
answer does not come at first, perseverance and pertinacity aye and
until the object is attained.

It is expressly intimated in the narrative that there is sometimes a
long, and from our view-point inexplicable delay. This is the meaning of
the expression "though he bear long with them." This phrase is not taken
here in its ordinary signification,--an endurance of injuries; it means
that he holds back long, and resists their pressure for relief.

Here are the two sides over against each other: they cry day and night,
and he, hearing their continuous cry, refrains from bestowing the relief
for which they passionately plead. As God keeps back the answer, they
redouble the cry; as they redouble the cry, God still withholds the
answer. Expressly we are informed he will give answer; he will avenge
his own elect. The eternal Father treasures up all the supplications of
his children, and he will yet give them deliverance. When his time comes
the deliverance will be complete; but in the meantime the interesting
inquiry presents itself, Why does he delay at all? In the light of
Scripture we are able to give a satisfactory answer to this inquiry.

The reason why the widow's claims were left long unsettled in the court
was the self-pleasing indolence of the judge. The love of his own ease
was the motive that induced him both to refuse redress at first and to
grant it afterwards. He refused to avenge her until he perceived that to
do her justice would afford him less trouble than to withhold it. In the
treatment which the petitions of the elect receive at the throne of