274 
have power ta change material things. Minds have power 
also, to a certain extent, to change other minds, and so to 
change these other minds as to lead to the change of material 
things by their mediate agency. If we take any great work 
wdiich has been effected by men, and go back into its real 
history so as to note the facts of that history, all this at least 
is irresistibly manifest. Say it is a great viaduct that now 
spans a valley, and we run rapidly back overall the occurrences 
that have issued as their combined result in this vast work, till 
we reach the first thought to which it can be traced in an in- 
dividual mind : we have in those facts, beyond all question, in- 
stances in which minds acted upon material things — instances 
in which minds acted on other minds so that these again acted 
on material things — and instances, moreover, in which chains 
of minds acted on each other and led to material, as the result 
of mental, changes. Among these facts we find askings as 
really as any other facts whatever — we find givings follow- 
ing those askings — we find receivings following those givings ; 
we find no fact of any kind in the universe that is more real 
than those askings , givings , and receivings. There is no ante- 
cedence or consequence more evident, than that which holds 
good between those said askings, givings, and receivings. 
Not that the antecedence and consequence are uniform, for 
there are refusings following askings as well as givings; but 
with all the lack of uniformity, no one can doubt that in 
myriads of cases the giving follows the asking as its effect, 
and is as evidently that effect as is any other consequent the 
effect of any other antecedent whatever. But among the facts 
with which we find ourselves surrounded are askings directed 
to God. What is the sole element of difference in the case of 
these askings ? Matter is matter in this case as in every other 
in which it is involved — mind is mind also in this case as in 
every other — only in this case one mind is perfect ; in all others 
the minds asking and those supplicated are imperfect. Call 
this perfection infinite, absolute, anything you choose — your 
words make no alteration on that mind which has all possible 
qualities that go to make up a Perfect Being. And. now comes 
the question — Is one of these qualities that of insensibility to 
askings ? Beyond the possibility of dispute the askings are 
there — the sensibility to the askings and the givings alone are 
denied. Man acts upon matter, and upon mind too, when 
requested to do so. Man refuses to act on matter, and also on 
mind, though requested to do so. Is it essential to his coming 
nearer perfection that he should alivays refuse ? No one will 
say so. Is it essential, then, to the perfection of God that He 
should always refuse ? Is deafness to entreaty a perfection ? 
