Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

as are impious; and from both, such as are absurd; may indeed be expected. But the existence of such persons in the desk, although an indelible reproach to those, who are bound to lay hands suddenly on no man, and to all, who voluntarily attend the ministry of these persons, infers no objection against extemporaneous prayer. Among the men, who are educated, and morally qualified, for the ministry, too few will always be found guilty of this conduct to furnish any serious argument in favour of a Liturgy. While among so many, and so discreet, Christians, who, through many ages, and in many countries, have worshipped in this manner, no difficulty of this kind has ever been seriously felt; the objection is plainly imaginary.

Prayer is, of all kinds of discourse, that which least demands elegance of style. Every professed ornament it rejects with disdain. The simplest, plainest, and least artificial manner of uttering his thoughts, alone becomes the character of a suppliant, or the occasion and design of his supplication. He, who feels inclined to pray, will loath all critical phraseology in his prayers. Decency, every where demanded, is indispensable in the worship of God: but, beyond this, nothing is necessary in our prayers, bcside humility, faithfulness, and fervour. But decency is easily attainable by men of moderate talents, without the aid of a superior education. Plain men, as is not unfrequently seen both in private and public religious assemblies, pray with much propriety, and with no small edification to their fellow-Christians. He, who has universally made prayer a prime duty of man, has qualified man for the performance of this duty; and, as I apprehend, much more happily than this objection supposes.

2. It is objected also, that extemporaneous prayer must be attended with confusion in the mind of the hearer.

The ignorance of each petition before it is heard; the want of time to join in it after it is heard; the necessary suspension of devotion until it is concluded; the necessity of attending to what succeeds; the detention of the mind from its proper business by the very novelty, with which it is gratified; form, together, the sources of this confusion; and furnish, in the view of Dr. Paley, a fundamental objection against extemporary prayer, even where the minister's office is discharged with every possible advantage, and accomplishment. Concerning this objection, I observe,

First, That it attaches a gross, and fundamental impropriety to the prayers of inspired men, mentioned in the Scriptures.

The prayer of Solomon, at the dedication of the Temple, was, I think, unquestionably intended to awaken the spirit of devotion in the great assembly, before which it was uttered; and to become the vehicle of their own supplications. But this design was impracticable on that occasion, and with respect to that assembly, as truly, and as extensively, as with respect to any mod

ern congregation of Christians. There are many instances, also, in which the Apostles, and their fellow-Christians, assembled for prayer. The prayers, actually uttered on these occasions, were, I think, with a degree of probability next to certainty, extemporary. The persons, who heard them, could no better tell the import of each petition, before they heard it, than modern Christian assemblies. Their devotion was as much suspended, until a petition was concluded. They were as much held in continual expectation; were detained as much from their proper business of joining in prayer; and were, in all other respects, subjected to as many disadvantages. The unavoidable conclusion from these premises is, that the Apostles prayed in a manner, unfitted for the purposes of devotion, unedifying to those with whom they prayed, and of course unapproved by the Spirit of God.

This conclusion no objector will admit. But if an objector refuse to admit the conclusion; he must, I think, give up the premises. If men could profitably unite in extemporary prayer, in the days of Solomon, or in the days of the Apostles, they can do

it now.

Secondly. The same objection lies with equal force, to a great extent, against the union, which the objectors themselves suppose to exist, and will acknowledge to be absolutely necessary, in other parts of religious worship.

A considerable number of persons, from perhaps one half to seven-eighths of the whole number, usually gathered in religious assemblies, are, throughout almost all Christian Countries, unable to read. Of these it may be properly observed, here, that, from the confused manner, in which the responses in a Liturgy will ever be read by a numerous and mixed assembly, they must very imperfectly hear, and understand, this part of the prayers. That, which they gain by hearing, however, is all which they gain. All these, unless they learn the prayers by heart, a fact, which, it is presumed, rarely happens, must be in a much less favourable situation, in some respects, and better situated in none, than when they are present at extemporary prayers.

Equally unable are these persons to read Psalms. If men cannot join in the prayers, uttered by a minister, it will be difficult to show how they can unite in the praises, sung by a choir.

My audience well know, that hearing the word of God is, in my own view, a part, and a very solemn and important part, of public worship. To receive divine truth, and divine precepts, as being really divine, with reverence, faith, and love, is an ordinance as truly appointed by God, and as acceptable means of honouring him, as prayer, or praise. To hear with any advantage, it is necessary, that we should both understand, and feel, what we hear. In order to understand, it is indispensable, that we examine every thing, uttered by the Preacher, which is not absolutely obvious, with a momentary investigation employed upon each of his asser

In order to feel, it is equally necessary, that a little longer time should be spent upon every part of a discourse, which is fitted to awaken feeling. The time, necessary for both these acts of the mind, must, at least, be equal to that, which is demanded for such union in prayer, as will make the several petitions our own. But all the confusion, suspense, detention, and embarrassment from novelty, will here have as much influence to prevent us froin hearing a Sermon, in a proper manner, as from joining in extemporary prayer. Here, also, the labouring recollection, and embarrassed, or tumultuous delivery, of which Dr. Paley complains, will have their full effect. Most men, unless when destitute of self-possession, speak extemporaneously, with more distinctness and propriety, than they read; and are, therefore, more readily, and perfectly, understood. But if an audience do not understand, and feel, a sermon, they fail as effectually of performing this part of religious worship, as of performing the duty of prayer, when they do not join in the petitions. The same difficulties, therefore, attend, thus far, the performance of both these religious services, which are here supposed to attend extemporary prayer. It is presumed, however, that they are imaginary in both cases: for,

Thirdly. The answer to the former objection is applicable, with the same force, to this: viz. That the difficulties, complained of, have never existed in such a manner, as to be of serious importance, in the view of those who have worshipped, publicly, with extemporary prayer.

In the long periods throughout which, and among the numerous millions by whom, this mode of worship has been adopted, no complaint of any magnitude has ever arisen concerning this subject. It will not be asserted, and with decency cannot, that these persons have been less serious, less scrupulous about their worship, or less anxious to perform the duties of religion aright, than an equal number of their fellow-christians. Experience, therefore, is wholly against both of these objections; and experience is the only evidence, or umpire, in the case.

The advocates for forms of prayer admit, that they are attended by some disadvantages. Among these, Dr. Paley considers the two following as the principal.

1. That forms of prayer, composed in one age, become unfit for another, by the unavoidable change of language, circumstances, and opinions.

This objection must, doubtless, be allowed to have some degree of force. I do not, however, think it necessarily of very serious importance. To make frequent alterations in so solemn a service would, certainly, be dangerous. Nor ought they ever to be made without extreme caution. Yet when they are plainly demanded by existing circumstances, it can hardly be supposed, that a collection of Christians would refuse their consent to safe

and reasonable changes: especially after the evil had become considerable.

2. That the perpetual repetition of the same form of words produces weariness, and inattentiveness, in the congregation.

This I esteem a more serious difficulty than the former; so far as such a repetition exists: while I readily acknowledge, that its existence appears to me unnecessary. For this evil, Dr. Paley observes, "Devotion may supply a remedy." I admit that it may; and doubt not that in individual minds it does; at least in a considerable measure. Still the objection is far from being removed. Every mode of worship ought to be so formed, as to awaken devotion, always too languid; and not so as to diminish a flame, which is scarcely perceptible. It is the nature of all repetition, as well as of continued sameness, soon to weary minds, formed, like ours, with an inherent love of change and novelty. This, in every other case, is perceived, and acknowledged. No reason appears, why it should not be acknowledged in this. Devotion easily languishes in the most pious minds; and ought therefore to be assisted, not repressed. The best men complain often, and justly, of lukewarm affections, and wandering thoughts. What, then, shall be said of others? Certainly the fervour of devotion, referred to, must be unsafely relied on, to remedy the evils of a wearisome service in the minds of a congregation at large.

To obviate the force of these remarks, it may be said, that psalms and hymns are sung in frequent repetition. I reply, that these are rarely repeated, when compared with repetitions in forms of prayer. Yet even these, when sung several times within a short period, become obviously tiresome.

But besides that, the psalms are given us in Scripture, and are therefore regarded with a reverence, which can be claimed by no human composition. Both psalms and hymns are always sung; and are, therefore, recommended to the hearer by the powerful aid of music. This is an advantage, which nothing else can boast; and counterbalances whatever tediousness would otherwise be found in any necessary or proper repetition. These, therefore, may be fairly laid aside, as being without the debate.

3. To these objections ought to be added another; That the Mode of uttering the forms of prayer, in actual use, is unhappy.

This mode, as is well known, is the audible union of a whole Congregation in reading each prayer, throughout a considerable part of the service. The effect of this practice, so far as I can judge from my own experience, is, in a greater or less degree, to disturb the attention, and confound the thoughts, of the several suppliants. How far the power of habit may go towards lessening, or removing, these evils, it is impossible for me, without more experience of the effects of this mode of worship, to judge. But, independently of this consideration, so many voices, set by nature to so many different keys, and directed in so many different

methods of modulation, are certainly an embarrassment of that quietness and steadiness of thought, that entire self-possession, so desirable during the time of religious worship. Sounds, which are very numerous, are, when uttered at the same moment, almost of course perplexing. Discordant sounds are necessarily unpleasant: and no circumstances can prevent this effect on the mind.

4. Forms of prayer must necessarily be General: whereas the nature of prayer demands, that our petitions should in a great measure be particular.

It is no part of the design of prayer to change the purposes, or conduct of the Creator. Its whole import consists in exciting our obedience to him, and the amendment of ourselves. By awakening in our minds a sense of our guilt, dangers, necessities, helplessness, dependence, and indebtedness; of our own littleness, and the greatness, wisdom, and goodness, of our Maker; we are improved in our moral character, and fitted to receive the blessings, which we need. The more these emotions are excited, the more effectually are these ends accomplished. Of course, the most advantageous means should always be used for this purpose.

Hence it will be easily seen, that prayer ought, as far as may be, to consist of petitions, confessions, thanksgiving, and adoration, formed in particular, not in general, thoughts and expressions. General declarations, and images, of all kinds, except when eminently important, are feeble and unimpressive. Particular ones, on the contrary, are deeply, and alone, impressive.

Whenever the end of what we speak, or write, is to interest either the imagination, or the heart; it is a rule of every Rhetorical writer, and ordinarily the practice of every man who follows nature, to use particular images and expressions. No reason appears, why this rule, founded in the native character of man, may not be applied to the present case with the same propriety as to any other.

The principal end of prayer is, not to teach, but to move, the heart. The more this rule is followed, the more will the end be attained. In all the warrantable means of quickening the affections, prayer ought plainly to abound. Both the sentiments, and language, ought to be simple, artless, apparently the result of no labour, derived from the occasion, and springing directly from the heart. To this scheme, the confessions, petitions, and thanksgivings, should, I think, be generally conformed, wherever it is intended to be made deeply impressive.

This is a purpose, which no form of prayer, however admirably composed, can successfully accomplish. Designed for so many persons, occasions, and ages, it must of necessity be, to a great extent, general; and so far defective. The mind, deeply interested by the occasion, must be disappointed of what it naturally expects; and displeased, when it finds the strain of sentiment falling short of its own feelings. In this degree, therefore, it will fail VOL. IV.

20

« ÎnapoiContinuă »