thee all doubting, and question nothing at all, when thou askest any thing of the Lord, saying within thyself, how shall I be able to ask any thing of the Lord, seeing I have so greatly sinned against him? Do not think thus, but turn unto the Lord with all thy heart, and ask of him, without doubting, and thou shalt know the mercy of the Lord.-For God is not as men, mindful of the injuries he has received; but he forgets injuries, and has compassion upon his creature.—Wherefore, purify thy heart from all the vices of this present world, and from doubting, and put on faith, and thou shalt receive all that thou shalt ask. -But he that doubts shall hardly live unto God, except he repent. "10 The principle for which we contend is here fully recognised; it is the heart of the worshipper, and that alone, which God regards in the acceptance or rejection of prayer. The precept, to put away doubting in prayer, is also scriptural: but, nevertheless, it would hardly be possible to display more consummate ignorance of the nature, not only of prayer, but of the whole scheme of Christianity, than in the passage before us. As many of the points here touched upon will come under our notice elsewhere, we will merely state our objections generally. We deny, then, that the sinner has any ground of hope in the badness of the Divine memory; God does not, cannot, forget any thing.-Nor is there forgiveness of sin with him, save in the atonement of our Lord Jesus Christ; a doctrine never once mentioned, or even alluded to, in the entire passage. We also deny that there is any power in man, either to purify his own heart, or to offer to God, by his own unassisted effort, the prayer which he will hear and answer. For these, he must be altogether indebted to that Holy Ghost who is also termed in Scrip10 Hermas, Comm. 9.

ture "the Spirit of supplication ;" and of whom it is declared, that he "helpeth the infirmities" of the believer in prayer, "himself making intercession for him."12-St. Hermas had entirely lost sight of this important doctrine also. We in the last place object, that the man who, in compliance with this advice, should endeavour, in his own strength, to put off doubting and to put on faith, would probably appear before his Maker in a spirit even still more offensive to Him: that of vain confidence and presumption. The prayer of faith, and the assurance of hope, are both unequivocally declared in Scripture to be the gifts of God, and are, therefore, altogether unattainable by any merely human effort. Another fundamental doctrine of Christianity, then, that of the divine assistance, is totally misapprehended by this early writer; who grievously errs, in ascribing to man the power of so purifying himself from sin as to be competent to offer acceptable prayers to God; independently, both of the atonement of Christ, and of the aids of the Holy Spirit, to neither of which he makes the slightest allusion.

Tertullian, the next writer who has treated upon prayer, also greatly mistakes the doctrine of Holy Scripture. His comment upon the fifth petition of the Lord's Prayer, "forgive us our trespasses,"13 is characterised by the same omission that we have already noticed in the writings of Hermas; it does not contain a single allusion to the atonement.1 We only repeat, that in our apprehension of

11 Zech. xii. 10.

12 Rom. viii. 26.

13 De Oratione, c. 7.

14 The Bishop of Lincoln observes upon the same peculiarity, as running through the whole of Tertullian's writings; he also cites other passages, abundantly showing the strict orthodoxy of this father on the doctrine of

the Christian scheme, any petition for pardon of sin which is not mixed with faith in the sacrifice and death of Christ, is a mere mockery of God:-and therefore, that the commentator who forbears all mention of it, in writing expressly upon the subject of remission, greatly misleads his readers, even though his remarks may be excellent in themselves.

Nor have we yet seen the extent of this father's misapprehensions, upon the subject of prayer. He thus rebukes certain evil practices which prevailed in the Christian assemblies during divine worship:-"It is the custom of some to sit during prayer; but if it is irreverent to sit in the presence of those whom we greatly revere and venerate, it is surely a most irreligious act, in the presence of the living God, and while the angel of prayer himself is standing; for we thereby reproach God that praying to him wearies us. We most powerfully commend our prayers to God by worshipping him with modesty and humility, not extravagantly tossing up our arms, but elevating them moderately and gracefully; with the countenance not impudently erect, but meekly and humbly dejected like the publican's.15 It is also proper that the tones of the voice should be subdued; for, what tremendous windpipes shall we require if our prayers are best heard and answered when we say them the loudest !-God hearkens not to the voice but to the heart. If God listens for a sound in prayer, how could Jonah's prayer ascend to heaven from the very abyss, through the bowels of so great a beast, and through

justification; and endeavours to account for the almost uniform omission of the atonement, in those places where it was most important that it should be introduced, by the circumstance, that no controversy had then arisen upon the subject. Eccl. Hist., c. 5., p. 330.

15 De Orat., c. 12.

so vast a depth of sea-water. 16 What do the performers of these obstreperous acts of devotion, but shout that their neighbours may hear them? and if such be the case, where is the difference between their mode of prayer, and praying in the corners of the streets ?"17 Now, though I entirely agree with our author in the great impropriety and indecency of every one of the practices he condemns, (all of which I am sorry to say may even now be observed in public worship,) and though I greatly rejoice in the testimony to the spiritual nature of Christ's religion, which is borne in this passage, by one of whose intellectual powers I entertain so high an opinion, I must, nevertheless, protest against the line of argument he pursues in administering his just and well-merited reproof. I exceedingly disapprove of sitting in prayer, but only because I hold it to be indicative of an irreverent and secular state of mind in the worshipper; this, I conceive, is displeasing to God, not that the mere posture of the body is an act of disrespect to him and to his angels; were this the case, sitting would be at all times unlawful, inasmuch as they are every where present. On exactly the same principle, while I agree with Tertullian in reprobating loud and clamorous tones and violent action, either in public or private devotion, I utterly deny that any modulations of voice we can compass, or any gesticulations we can perform, either with our features or our arms, will one whit commend our prayers to God.-Nay, I maintain that, on the one hand, many an acceptable prayer has been offered with a total disregard to the posture of the body, and with much inde

16 The gross notions of spiritual existence which, as we have already stated, prevailed in these times, will in some measure account for the oddity of this remark.

17 Idem, c. 13.

corum both of tone and action; and that on the other, many a one hath appeared before God with a most scrupulous attention to the external forms of piety, who has, nevertheless, offered the prayer of the hypocrite, which is an abomination unto him: Tertullian himself, and in the same passage, gives us the reason of this: "God regards the heart and not the tones and gestures of the worshipper" and consequently this bodily exercise only profits, when it is a true indication of the mental state of the performer; and is worse than worthless, when assumed as the disguise of insincerity.

Some other erroneous practices are also mentioned by Tertullian, which it may be well here to enumerate, in order to show the irresistible violence with which the set and current of public opinion was bearing away all that was peculiar and characteristic in Christianity, till nothing but the mere frame-work of its external ceremonial remained; and even that frame-work, the same current was as rapidly choking up and deforming with the rubbish of the mouldering fabric of heathenism, which drifted upon its surface, and accumulated there. These ceremonies consisted of bathing before prayer, in commemoration of baptism,-washing the hands before devotional acts, (founded, doubtless, on Psa. xxvi. 6. ;)-taking off the upper garment to pray; this custom, he tells us, originated in a ridiculous misapprehension of 2 Tim. iv. 13. Refusing the kiss of peace, with which all the public assemblies of the early Christians concluded, on station and fast-days: Tertullian wishes to restrict this usage to the Paschal fast only; and brings some very bad inconclusive arguments in support of the restriction.

Clement of Alexandria, does not appear to have been at all in advance of his cotemporaries in his apprehension