AN EXPOSITION OF 
past finding out."* But something more is 
required by our prayer than the submission 
_of our understandings to the divine dispensa- 
We 
tions: our wills must likewise submit. 
must be ready to bear with patience whatso- 
ever it pleases God to inflict upon us ; assured 
‘that he who governs the world, will order all 
things wisely, and cause them to work toge- 
ther for the good of his people, it is our duty 
to rely upon him with entire and unshaken 
confidence ; nor even, if possible, to desire 
that the affliction with whieh he visits us, 
may be withdrawn an hour sooner, vr be in- 
flicted with the smallest degree less of seve- 
Tity, than is necessary to answer the gracious 
purpose which he designs to accomplish by 
it. In all conditions we ought to be resign- 
ed, and to sacrifice our will to the will of 
God. Howsoever severe, howsoever opposed 
to our natural propensities be the adversity 
aypich eppresses us, formidable as the trial 
ay be to which we are called, and bitter as 
may be the cup presented to us, after the ex- 
ample of him whose steps we are directed to 
follow, it is our duty to submit, and say— 
“thy will be done,”—* not as I will, but as 
thou wilt." 
sere 
Mr. Mendham, in distinguishing the 
meanings of the term Father, as applied 
to God, in reference to Christ, and in 
relation to his followers, observes, “ that 
the mention of the appellation, ‘your 
father,’ as applied to the disciples, and 
6 my father,’ as applied to Christ, is very 
~ 
frequent ; yet with such scrupulous atten- 
tion was the distinction between the dif- 
ferent senses of the appellation preserved, 
that when, after his resurrection, he ap- 
peared to Mary, and he came to the 
very verge of confounding that distinc- 
tion, he avoided the impropriety by a 
very significant repetition :—“ Go,” said 
le, “to my brethren, and say unto them, 
I ascend unto my Father and your Fa- 
ther, and to my God and your ,God.” 
We must confess that we do not, in this 
instance, see either how an impropriety 
was avoided, or how it was on the verge 
of existing. el APY 
» In the description of the paternal mer- 
cy of God, which occurs in page 16, we 
bink that alittle too. much of an- 
thropomorphitism is admitted... 
The author of the present work, wi 
y others. supposes an. indefinite qua- 
y, which he denominates the glory of 
yod, to be the primary motive of his 
action, and makes the usual distinctions 
between justice, goodness, and. mercy. 
it 
WU 
» 
os! Rom, xi. 33.” 
THE LORD'S PRAYERS 143 
We cannot help thinking that christians 
frequently embarrass themselves by false 
distinctions between these attributes, 
and that important practical errors re- 
sult from any other considerationsof them 
than as different exhibitions of the same 
quality, goodness, the true glory of 
God, and the constituent principle of all 
moral rectitude. 
We were sorry to see, from any quar- 
ter, any disparagement of the works of 
Dr. Paley, (see page 57) because we 
conceive him to be one of those writers 
on theological subjects, to whom the age 
is most indebted. We considered it as 
a pleasing presage of general improve- 
ment, in this most important branch of 
knowledge, that the use of some of his 
works was adopted in one of our univer- 
sities; in short, we are inclined to apply 
to the learned archdeacon that eulogium 
which Quintilian gives to Tuily :-—* Iile 
se profecisse sciat, cui Cicero valde pla- 
cebit ;”? and the converse of this propo- 
sition, we believe, will be found accu- 
rate. 
With the theological sentiments of the 
respectable writer, we have at present 
little concern; they are, in this work, 
by its nature, in general rather assumed 
than proved. We are, however, sur- 
prized at his supposition, that the whole 
of what 4e esteems christianity, is des 
ducible by a fair and natural interpre- 
tation from the words of this prayer. 
We are sorry that Mr. Mendham, 
from many parts of whose work we have 
received much satisfaction, should give 
any occasion for the inculcation of an 
important moral quality, the very name 
of which appears to be now almost ex- 
ploded by many writers of theological 
controversy, that of candour. The 
word candour they seem to consider as 
implying something insidious, or at best 
as synonymous only with weakness of 
mind, and incompetency of judgment. 
By requesting candour, we do not re- 
quire aman to abandon his judgment, 
or ‘to surrender the importance of his 
opinions; we only expect, (what it surely 
is not too much to expect) when the many 
fallibilities of the human mind are con+ 
sidered, that he will admit the possibi< 
lity, that they who dissent from him 
most widely in judgment, respecting im= 
portant topics, may at least be sincere 
| t “ Matih.xxvi. 42. and39, See likewise Acts xxi. 14. Tertullian expresses this part of 
@ sense of ihe prayer:—Jam hoc dicto ad sufferentiam nosmetipsos premonemus,” 
