libly restore health? In fhort, if the efficacy of prayer were fo conftant and obfervable as to be relied upon before-hand, it is eafy to forefee that the conduct of mankind would, in proportion to that reliance, become carelefs and disorderly. It is poffible in the nature of things, that our prayers may, in many inftances, be efficacious, and yet our experience of their efficacy be dubious and obfcure. Therefore, if the light of nature inftruct us by any other arguments to hope for effect from prayer; ftill more, if the fcriptures authorize thefe hopes by promises of acceptance; it feems not a fufficient reafon for calling in queftion the reality of fuch effects, that our obfervations of them are ambiguous: especially fince it appears probable, that this very ambiguity is neceffary to the happiness and fafety of human life.

But fome, whofe objections do not exclude all prayer, are offended with the mode of prayer in use amongst us, and with many of the subjects, which are almoft univerfally introduced into public worship, and recommended to private devotion. To pray for particular favours by name, is to dictate, it has been faid, to divine wisdom and goodness: to intercede for others,

D 4

others, efpecially for whole nations and empires, is ftill worfe; it is to prefume that we poffefs fuch an intereft with the Deity, as to be able, by our applications, to bend the most important of his counfels; and that the happiness of others, and even the profperity of communities, is to depend upon this intereft and upon our choice. Now, how unequal foever our knowledge of the divine. œconomy may be to the folution of this difficulty, which requires perhaps a comprehenfion of the entire plan, and of all the ends of God's moral government, to explain fatisfactorily, we can understand one thing concerning it, that it is, after all, nothing more than thẹ making of one man the inftrument of happiness and mifery to another; which is perfectly of a piece with the course and order that obtain, and which we must believe were intended to obtain, in human affairs. Why may we not be affifted by the prayers of other men, who are beholden for our fupport to their labour? Why may not our happiness be made in fome cafes to depend upon the interceffion, as it certainly does in many upon the good offices, of our neighbours? The happiness and mifery of great numbers we fee oftentimes at the difpofal

of

of one man's choice, or liable to be much af fected by his conduct: what greater difficulty is there in fuppofing, that the prayers of an individual may avert a calamity from multitudes, or be accepted to the benefit of whole communities?

CHAP.

t

CHA P. III.

OF THE DUTY AND EFFICACY OF PRAYER,

AS REPRESENTED IN SCRIPTURE.

TH

HE reader will have obferved, that the reflections stated in the preceding chapter, whatever truth and weight they may be allowed to contain, rife many of them no higher than to negative arguments in favour of the propriety of addreffing prayer to God. To prove that the efficacy of prayers is not inconfiftent with the attributes of the Deity, does not prove that prayers are actually efficacious; and in the want of that unequivocal teftimony, which experience alone could afford to this point (but which we do not poffefs, and have seen good reason why we are not to expect) the light of nature leaves us to controverted probabilities, drawn from the impulfe by which mankind have been almost univerfally prompted to devotion, and from fome beneficial purpofes, which, it is conceived, may be better anfwered by the audience of prayer, than

than by any other mode of communicating the fame bleffings. The revelations which we deem authentic, completely fupply this defect of natural religion. They require prayer to God as a duty; and they contain pofitive affurances of its efficacy and acceptance. We could have no reafonable motive for the exercise of prayer, without believing that it may avail to the relief of our wants. This belief can only be founded, either in a fenfible experience of the effect of prayer, or in promises of acceptance fignified by divine authority, Our knowledge would have come to us in the former way, less capable, indeed, of doubt, but fubjected to the abufes and inconveniences briefly described above: in the latter way, that is, by authorized fignifications of God's general difpofition to hear and answer the devout fupplications of his creatures, we are encouraged to pray, but not to place fuch a dependence upon prayer, as might relax other obligations, or confound the order of events and of human expectations.

The fcriptures not only affirm the propriety of prayer in general, but furnish precepts or examples which juftify fome topics and fome modes of prayer that have been thought exceptionable.

And