My brethren, if I could have felt that men generally assented in _heart_ to the doctrine of that Collect, and were endeavouring to act out its prayers in their life, I should have uttered none of the reproof that has passed my lips. But is it not the fact that men are betaking themselves to God in this way only as one of possible remedies and preventives—not tracing the infliction to Him, but merely asking the removal, of Him?: “_Somehow_ we are in trouble; will God deliver us out of it?” Well is it, indeed, when men thus far believe in a God of Providence; for the human dogmas of our days about fixed laws, necessary and certain revolutions or wars and plagues to keep down the population and so forth, have reasoned and calculated too many into the belief that prayer for the alteration, at least of temporal circumstances, is altogether idle, if not profane. Well is it then, if we still believe that God _can_ interfere in the operations of the world, and that if we will call upon Him there is hope that He will. But, my brethren, we shall not have drawn near with acceptable prayer if we have only asked Him to heal us, if we have not also acknowledged that He has torn us. The prayer will not be acceptable, because He _will_ be acknowledged in all His ways, worshipped for His Majesty as well as His goodness; seen in His wrath, as well as sought in His clemency. And, moreover, it will not be effectual prayer; for His visitations always have a purpose (“Ye shall know that I have not done without cause all that I have done”), and how shall we have responded to the purpose, if we have not recognised the visitation?