“And so from _repentance_ he skips quite over _new obedience_ to come to _prayer_, which is the last religious duty insisted upon by me here. But according to his use, without either answering or mentioning what I say; which would have showed him plainly what kind of prayer I intend, not contemplative prayer in general, as it includes thanksgiving, but that most proper kind of prayer which we call _petition_, which used to be thus defined, to be an act of religion by which we desire of God something which we have not, and hope that we shall obtain it by him; quite contrary to this, T. H. tells us, (_h_) that prayer ‘is not a cause nor a means of God’s blessing, but only a signification that we expect it from him’. If he had told us only, that prayer is not a meritorious cause of God’s blessings, as the poor man by begging an alms doth not deserve it, I should have gone along with him. But to tell us, that it is not so much as a means to procure God’s blessing, and yet with the same breath, that ‘God will not give his blessings but to those who pray’, who shall reconcile him to himself? The Scriptures teach us otherwise, (John xvi. 23): _Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you_: (Matth. vii. 7): _Ask, and it shall be given you, seek, and ye shal find, knock, and it shall be opened unto you_. St. Paul tells the Corinthians (2 Cor. i. 11), that he was _helped by their prayers_: that is not all; that _the gift was bestowed upon him by their means_. So prayer is a means. And St. James saith (chap. v. 16): _The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much_. If it be _effectual_, then it is a cause. To show this efficacy of prayer, our Saviour useth the comparison of a father towards his child, of a neighbour towards his neighbour; yea, of an unjust judge, to shame those who think that God hath not more compassion than a wicked man. This was signified by Jacob’s wrestling and prevailing with God. Prayer is like the tradesman’s tools, wherewithal he gets his living for himself and his family. But, saith he, ‘God’s will is unchangeable’. What then? He might as well use this against study, physic, and all second causes, as against prayer. He shows even in this, how little they attribute to the endeavours of men. There is a great difference between these two: _mutare voluntatem_, to change the will; (which God never doth, in whom there is not the least shadow of turning by change; his will to love and hate was the same from eternity, which it now is and ever shall be; his love and hatred are immovable, but we are removed; _non tellus cymbam, tellurem cymba reliquit_); and _velle mutationem_, to will a change; which God often doth. To change the will, argues a change in the agent; but to will a change, only argues a change in the object. It is no inconstancy in a man to love or to hate as the object is changed. _Præsta mihi omnia eadem, et idem sum._ Prayer works not upon God, but