have all the encouragement to pray that the Scriptures will justify, I should like very much, to insert your communication in the next number of the Magazine. I go with you, with all my heart, in nearly all you say; though strong as is the encourageinent to pray which you thus exhibit from the Bible, I do not think it quite makes out the point aimed at, absolute and positive certainty that the petition will be granted.

I should like however, to say a few words on the subject; not to argue it any farther, but to present in a clear view the real question at issue. The following passages of Scriptures, which I transcribe from your letter, present the subject distinctly.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he shall give it you.

"All things whatsoever, ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive."

This language is certainly very broad. So much so that no one understands it literally. All Christians agree in the necessity of admitting, that, unlimited as it is on the face of it, some limitations must be understood. I beg that this may be particularly observed, as all I have to say rests upon it. Nobody believes that a Christian will infallibly receive every thing whatever, that he may ask the Father in the name of Christ; so that the difference of opinion which prevails on this subject does not arise from the fact that some admit these promises in all their length and breadth, while others limit them; but from the fact, that while all agree in the necessity of limitation, some apply it in one mode and some in another.

Your limitations are two; and they are I believe, those always adopted by those who embrace the general view you take of the subject.

1. The thing asked must be a spiritual blessing.

2. The prayer must be accompanied by right efforts.

The other view imposes but one limitation, viz:

That God may decline granting any request, when in particular cases it seems, on the whole, best to do so.

The former opinion would make the passage read thus: "All things whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he shall do it ;"

Provided, however, that it be a spiritual blessing that is asked, and

Provided, also, the prayer be accompanied by right efforts. The other opinion would make it read thus:

"All things whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you."

Provided, however, that special reasons may, in some particu lar cases, prevent his granting the request.

I believe, as I said above, that all Christians agree in understanding these promises, as in fact limited in one or the other of the ways I have described. It is therefore a question between two modes of limitation, one or the other of which all agree, must be admitted, though neither are expressed in the letter; and I suppose that we are to determine between them by considering,

1. Which is most probable, in view of the relation between God as an almighty sovereign, and man a short-sighted, frail, dependent creature.

2. Which is most analagous to what would be understood by a child, as intended by a similar promise from an earthly father, &c.

3. Which corresponds most closely with facts, as observed in the lives of the most devoted Christians.

As I remarked above however, I do not intend to discuss the question, but only to show what it really is. It must be agreed by all that a very large portion of children who are lost, perish through the neglect or unfaithfulness of their parents, and if cares ever occur, in which a child is left to his own way, notwithstanding the faithful efforts and sincere prayers of his father and mother, they must be very rare.

If you have no objection, I should like very much to insert your letter, together with this, and any remarks from yourself which this may suggest, in the next number of the Magazine. Very sincerely yours,

MY DEAR SIR,

LETTER III.

REJOINDER.

Boston, Dec. 20, 1833.

I thank you for the kind manner in which you express yourself as to my remarks. You must be aware that they were written in great haste, as far as the composition is concerned, though I have thought on the subject for some years. I had not the remotest intention of publication when I wrote them; still, as I am impressed with the importance of urging more closly, upon parents and friends, the responsibility of believing prayer and consistent practice, I am willing that you should use them as you may judge best.

As you invite me to reply to the view you present, I will state

one or two things for consideration, not so much by way of discussion, as of stating the manner in which your exhibition strikes

me.

Where a promise, an obligation or a grant of any kind is made, I suppose a lawyer, and perhaps any person on reflection would say that we are bound to give full eflect to the meaning of the language employed, unless the same writing which contains the promise, &c. also contains certain distinct or obvious limitations or conditions. In such a case the limitations and conditions must be stated in very broad terms, by the person promising. These, I think, are the only exceptions which can be made. And you will doubtless admit that the Scriptures are to be understood in the same manner as we would understand any other writing so far as construction is concerned.

When, our Saviour then tells his disciples that whatsoever they shall ask, the Father will give them,-if we find that he has elsewhere stated what those blessings are which the Father will bestow, when asked for in his name, we should understand him as saying thus: "I have already told you that when I depart I will send the Comforter, whose office it shall be to convince mankind generally (i. e. the world, as used in the text) of sin, &c.; and you are to pray the Father and he will give you the Comforter, or he will send the Holy Spirit. But you are to ask in my name; hitherto ye have not so asked. Now, therefore, I say to you, verily, verily, whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, to send the Comforter to do, he shall give you the desire of your hearts; but remember I have elsewhere told that ye mustask believing; for let not any man that wavereth think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.”

you

It seems to me that the two limitations which I have made, are distinctly recognized in the Bible. But I never could see any foundation for the other limitation, unless it is found in 1 John 5: 14. I stated in my former letter that I thought this passage referred to the revealed will of God; and therefore if we conform to the two conditions already mentioned, we might say with James, we know that we have the thing we desire of him. Is there another word in the Bible upon which the limitation as to "particular cases" and "special reasons" can rest?

I think that the first of your closing remarks is answered by the fact that we only do as God has commanded, when we pray for the Holy Spirit in the manner supposed; and hence our short-sightedness does not affect the argument.

As to the second, suppose an earthly father should say, "My son, if you sincerely desire me to give you something which I promised in my letter to you, that you might have by asking,

and will show me by your conduct that you desire it, I will grant it;" and then, if the son complied, would the father be justified, under any supposable circumstances, in withholding the promised boon?

As to the third, I admit that this position appears to make against the view which I take: but does it in fact? Do we not often witness the prayers of holy persons answered for the conversion of their children? and when we do not, is not the remark often made, that such parents resemble Eli? They do not teach the principle of obedience and submission in tender years, and therefore their prayers are abortive.

I am, very sincerely, yours, &c.

For the Religious Magazine.

THE FAMILY REVIVAL.

THE family, whose condition I am to describe, is a representative of thousands in our churches, who are living in the full enjoyment of the highest Christian privileges. The father is actively engaged in the business of life. The pursuits of the world engross his chief care, from day to day. Yet, he is a Christian. He maintains, in his general intercourse with his fellow-men, a character consistent with his religious profession. In his household arrangements, all the forms and appearances of Christian worship are daily observed. The morning calls the inmates of the dwelling to the family altar. The Scriptures are read, and perhaps a hymn is sung. The prayer is offered: but when the circle are dispersed, it is at once evident that the exercise has made no strong impression.

The duties at home, the business abroad, and the pleasures of life, engage the attention of the various members of the household. It is not the great object of this family to glorify God. The parents are real Christians; but their affections have wandered from God, and are too much set upon this world. Their children are not interested in the great salvation, and their parents are so much devoted to their mental improvement and social accomplishments, as to feel too little that the claims of God and his kingdom are paramount to every thing else. They would shudder at the thought of saying that religion is not the great concern; and in their daily prayers they always offer the supplication, that they may have first an in

terest in the kingdom of God. But the children and the domestics see, from the yielding current of their life, that Christian duty is not unfrequently made to compromise with the customs of the world. Thus they go on, from time to time, their offspring growing up in impenitence. Their dwelling is not illuminated by the cheering light of the Saviour's face. The altar is there, but its fire is dim. The sacrifice is offered, but the lamb has a blemish. "Holiness to the Lord" is not legible on the walls of their tabernacle, and upon all its furniture. And the stranger "in their gates" would scarcely infer, that their house is the Lord's, and all that appertains to it, consecrated to his service.

But He, who loves his people, will not suffer them to go on, satisfying themselves with the cup of emptiness. He sends an affliction, to recal their affections to him. Sickness falls upon a child. Their loved one suffers, and the whole circle sympathize with it. The parents think of their past course. They call to mind what God has done for them, and what they have been doing in his cause. They feel convinced that a cold and worldly spirit has damped the ardor of piety, and that their lives have been barren and unfruitful. They plead for the recovery of their child, and they confess the guilt of their own backsliding. Their hearts are softened. They weep and pray. They return to God, and God returns to them.

Now, the spirit which reigns in their dwelling is changed. The worldly visiter does not come. Their minister, and their most devoted Christian friends, renew their visits, and the house of affliction becomes the place where God is acknowledged, and sought, and honored.

now.

How altered is the family prayer! No heartless formality It comes from stricken hearts. A father's and a mother's tenderest sympathies are touched, and an avenue is opened into their bosoms, through which the good Shepherd can communicate the richest of his spiritual blessings.

Morning and evening the word of truth is read, and regarded with far different feelings. It is seen and felt to be the bread of life to their souls, as well as to the sick sufferer's, whose days are apparently numbered. The parents think their child must die. They know, that if unrenewed, the soul must be lost! They cry to God. Faithfully now, if never before, they warn the child they love, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, and in no other name can one hope for salvation. The truth reaches the heart, with an emphasis never felt before. And the reason is, it comes from the heart. A father's and a mother's bosom bleed at the withering prospect of giving back thus to its Maker, the immortal spirit, which had been