Page images
PDF
EPUB

of this world, which furely our Lord never intended; and therefore it cannot be the truth of the cafe. Again,

What prayer is, and what are the ends intended to be answered by it, I have already fhewn, in a difcourfe on that fubject *, to which I refer my reader; in which he will plainly fee, that all prayer is not a farce and a mockery upon my principles, as my opponent imagines it to be. Tho', by the way, I think, all arguments drawn from confequences are juftly excluded out of the cafe. For, if what I have. advanced, is erroneous, let that be fhewn, and the work is done, I am confuted; but, if what I have offered be the truth, then no confequences, whether imaginary or real, can poffibly make it otherwife. But farther, I obferve, that our Lord, in the prayer, commonly called the Lord's-Prayer, hath taught, or required us, to put up this petition, viz. that God would give us day by day our daily bread. And the questions are, What is it that we are taught, or required, to ask of God in this petition? And what is it we are to expect by way of anfwer to it? Whether we are to defire, and expect, that God would, by a particular and Special interpofition of his power, give us every day the food we are to feed upon, and fupply every other want we may be expofed to? Or, whether we are to defire, and expect, or rather hope, that he will do it, in the course of 'H

*See my Collection of Tracts.

his

his general providence? Now, fuppofing the latter to be the cafe, and fuppofing, for argument fake, (tho' it is what I do not admit) that all fuch kind of prayers are a farce, and a mockery; yet, why fhould the reproach of it be caft upon me? feeing it is what all Chrif tians are equally affected with. However, I think, the end defigned, and which only can be answered, by prayer in general, is not to make any alteration or change in God, but only to influence and affect the perfon praying. And this, I think, will plainly appear to be the truth of the cafe, when I have examined the Lord's prayer, in its feveral articles, and have fhewed, that it is in this view only, that it can be a rational and proper address to God. And, I the rather chufe the Lord's prayer, to exemplify the point in hand by, than any other prayer; because, our Lord himself has given us this prayer, and has intended it to be, either a form of prayer to be used by us, or else to be a guide and direction to Christians, and to Christian societies, with refpect to the object, and the fubject, of their prayers, &c.

The first article in this form or guide to prayer, is expreffed in those words, viz. Our father, which art in heaven. In this article, we take upon us, to inform God of two things; First, that he is our Father: Secondly, that he is in heaven. With refpect to the first of these, I think, it is not to be fuppofed, that our Lord intended, that we, in the use of these words, should add to the divine knowledge and the divine

good

goodness, by our informing God, that he ftands to us in the relation of a Father, which relation, antecedent to our addrefs, he was ignorant of; and, thereby, engage him to act a fatherly part by us, which, before our application to him, he was not difpofed to do. This, I think, could not be our Lord's defign in directing us to addrefs Almighty God, as aforefaid; because, he knew full well, that the divine knowledge cannot poffibly be increased by us, and that God is in himself difpofed to do more abundantly for his dutiful children, than they can ask or think; confequently, fuch an addrefs, that is, to address God with this view, would be irrational and improper. Now, if our telling God that he is our Father, cannot poffibly increase the divine knowledge, nor the divine goodness, and confequently, cannot poffibly influence or change the Deity, the queftions will be, What fignifies this addrefs? Or, who is it that ought, or can be influenced and wrought upon by it? And, the answer to these queftions is moft apparent, viz. that it is the petitioner only who can, and who ought to be affected and influenced by the fore-mentioned addrefs; as he, hereby, reminds himself of the relation he ftands in to his Maker, and confe→ quently he ought to be ftirred up, from a fenfe of that relation, to increafe in fuch a temper and difpofition of mind, and fuch a behaviour, as is fuitable to, and becoming an affectionate and dutiful child of God; and this is H 2

the

1

the purpose, the fore-mentioned address is intended to ferve, and is capable of ferving. And,

In this first article of the Lord's prayer, we not only tell God, that he is our Father; but alfo, that he is in heaven. By his being in heaven, I think, is intended, that he is not like earthly parents, who, in many refpects, are upon a foot of equality with their children, but on the contrary, that he is, in all respects, greatly above them, greatly fuperior to them. And, with regard to this, I think, it is not to be fuppofed, that our Lord intended, that we, in the use of those words, fhould ftir up and prevail upon God to make a right use of that power and fuperiority, we hereby acknowledge him to have over us, which, antecedent to this addrefs, he was not difpofed to do; this, I say, could not be our Lord's defign, because he well knew that God is always difpofed, from his great goodness, to make the most proper use of his power and fuperiority, and, therefore, muft have been fo difpofed, antecedent to our addrefs; confequently, fuch an address would be irrational and improper. Now, if our telling God, that he is greatly above us, greatly fuperior to us, cannot poffibly affect or influence him, fo as to ftir him up to make any other ufe of his power and fuperiority, than he would have done, antecedent to this addrefs; then, the questions will be, Who is? Or, who can be influenced and wrought upon by it? And the answer is plain and evident, that it is the petitioner, and he only; as it awakens in

him a just fenfe of the power and fuperiority of God, and as it difpofes, or ought to difpofe him to be affected, and to act accordingly. Again,

The next article of the Lord's prayer is expreffed in those words, Hallowed be thy name. By this, I think, is intended, that men should have fuch a fenfe of the Deity impreffed upon their minds, as is worthy of him; that is, as is fuitable to his natural and his moral perfections. With respect to this, I think, it must not be fuppofed, that our Lord intended, that we, in the use of those words, fhould engage the Deity to take fuch measures with his creatures, as might introduce into their minds a proper fense of himself, which measures, antecedent to this address, he was not difpofed to take with them. This, I think, could not be our Lord's defign, in directing us to pray as aforefaid; becaufe, he was well fatisfied, that Almighty God does not ftand in need of the importunity of his creatures, to engage him to do, what was proper for him to do, antecedent to their арplication; confequently, fuch an addrefs to God, that is, addreffing him with this view, would be irrational and improper. Now, if our telling God, that we wish his name may be hallowed, cannot poffibly affect him, so as to difpofe him to do, what otherwise he would not have done; then, the questions will be, as before, viz. Who is? Or, who can? Or, who ought to be influenced and wrought upon, by this address? And the answer is plain, viz. that

« PreviousContinue »