tended to give a form of prayer, which is manifest from the direction, say thus,' and besides this, he intended to give them a general pattern for all their other prayers. For we cannot suppose that he designed to confine his followers to this particular form, so as to forbid them to offer up any other kind of supplication: but he directed that all their other prayers should agree with this, in substance, in brevity, in simplicity, and in their evangelical character. The two passages, therefore, are in full agreement, and were so understood by the Church. 'When ye pray,' saith Christ,' say thus, and after this manner.' That is, use this as a perpetual form, and make all your other prayers resemble it. (a)

That this pre-eminent form of devotion was intended to mark the fulness of the time and the maturity of the divine favor, seems to my mind sufficiently evident from the petitions it contains, that the kingdom of God might come, and his will be done, not by the Jews merely, but throughout the world-'As in heaven so on earth.' That sins

(a) It has also been ingeniously suggested, that the first time our Lord dictated this prayer, was for the purpose of public worship, because he delivered it in the Sermon on the Mount to the assembled multitude, and concluded it with a Doxology and Amen, which were only used in pub. lic worship. But that when the disciples desired to be taught a pri. vate prayer, he gave them the same form, concluding without the DoxoElogy and the Amen.

Poli Synop. Critic. Comment. in Mat. Cap. 6. § 9. p. 212. 30. Putabant Christum in monte, non formulam, sed tantum exemplar precum ipsis dedisse. At potiùs primam istam pro publica orationis formula reputabant, tum ex adjectione Coronidis Antiphono publico in Templo adeò similis, tum præsertim ex adjectione Amen, non nisi in cœtibus usitati. Orant ergò iterum, ut privatim eos orare doceat, et ille eandem repetit formulam, omissis verò Coronide et Amen, quæ publicum usum sapue. runt. Habes ergo signum publici usûs, tum in adjectione Amen, tum in Coronide, ex consonantia ejus ad Antiphonum in Templo; et privati, ex absentiâ Amen, et ex consonantia ejus ad ejaculationem in precibus Phy. lactericis.'

should now be forgiven, fully and freely, but not without the condition of a forgiving disposition on the part of the supplicant. That the bread from heaven was now ready to be given in constant supply, as the daily nourishment of the soul and above all, that God was now, through Christ, willing to be called their Father in heaven.' The observation of Cyprian, writing A. D. 250, on this last point, is expressive and beautiful. (b) What mercy on the part of our Lord,' saith he, what richness of grace and goodness, that he desires us to celebrate prayer in the sight of God in such wise, that we may call him Father, that as Christ is his Son, so even we might call ourselves the sons of God. Which name no one amongst us would have dared to use in prayer, unless he himself had allowed us the privilege.' And the following extract from Chrysostom in the latter part of the fourth century, gives an admirable commentary on the petition 'Give us this day, our daily bread.' (c)

(b) Cyp. de Orat. Domin. p. 221. 'Quanta autem Domini indulgentia, quanta circa nos dignationis ejus et bonitatis ubertas; qui sic nos voluerit orationem celebrare in conspectu Dei, ut Deum patrem voce. mus, et ut est Christus Dei filius, sic et nos Dei filios nuncupemus? Quod nomen nemo nostrum in oratione auderet attingere, nisi ipse nobis sic permisisset orare.'

(c) Jo, Chrysost. De oration. Domin. Homilia. op. om. Tom. 5. Ed. Paris. 1570. p. 607. Magnus iste panis, qui replet mentem et non ventrem. Iste panis et noster est, et angelorum: iste panis manducatur, et non finitur: iste panis totum mundum replet, et integer manet. De ipso comedimus, inde vivimus, inde pascimus, inde nutrimur, inde pervenimus. Et tamen quotidie illum quærimus, ne deficiat fides nostra, ne vires animæ nostræ in ista arcta et angusta via fatigatæ non perve. niant ad patriam. Ergo Domine pasce nos quotidie pane cœlesti, verbo tuo sancto quod carnem fieri voluisti, ut habitaret in nobis. Ipse panis est, qui fractus est illis ambulantibus in via, quem agnoverunt in fractione panis. Quid est enim frangere panem, nisi secretum aperire, agnoscere Deum et hominem ?'

I ought, perhaps, to state here, the well known opinion of many bib. lical commenta:ors, that the Saviour did not design to give his dis.

'Great is this bread,' saith he, which fills the mind and not the body. Not only is it our bread, but the bread of Angels. This is the bread which is eaten, but not consumed; which replenishes the whole world, and yet remains entire. Of it we eat, from it we live, are fed, are nourished, and are enabled to obtain. Nevertheless we seek it daily, lest our faith should fail, lest the powers of our soul, wearied in that strait and narrow way, might not hold out till we reach our home. Therefore, O Lord,, feed us daily with this celestial bread, with thy holy Word, which thou madest to become flesh that he might dwell with us. He himself is that bread, which was broken to those that were walking in the way, whom they recognised in the breaking of bread. For what is it to break bread, if it be not to open the mystery, to know him who was both God and Therefore, O Lord, give us this daily bread.'

man.

We have a further proof in favor of forms in the passage of St. Paul's epistle to Timothy, where he saith, (2 Tim. i. 13.) 'Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.' This expression has been frequently supposed to refer to the Apostles' creed, and I do not intend to question the probability of the conjecture. It is enough for our present object to claim it as a support for the general argument in ciples a new form in the Lord's prayer, so much as to condense what was previously in use among the Jews into a smaller compass. See Horne's Introduction, 3 Vol. 298, and Poole's Synopsis Critic. 4 Vol. p. 211. Comment. on Mat. Cap. 6. It is unquestionable that this opinion has been supported with great learning; yet I confess that I am not satisfied with it. My reasons, however, must be reserved for another work. To the argument in favor of forms of prayer, the controversy is of no importance. I would only add, in this place, my satisfaction in finding, that the learned Professor Tholuck, of Berlin, has taken the true ground on this subject, in his exposition of the Lord's prayer, lately translated for the Biblical Repository and Quarterly Observer.

favor of religious forms, since there are not wanting many who deny that there should be any forms at all, connected with the Gospel. Alas! that they cannot see how soon their theory would plunge us into a chaos, resembling the condition of the material world, when the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep.'

The next striking and conclusive fact upon the subject before us, meets our observation in the history of the Primitive Churches, which adopted Liturgies without exception. There was no controversy upon this question, from the days of the Apostles to the fifth century, when these various Liturgies were published. There was no debate, no complaint, no struggle about the mode of worship; while upon other subjects there were many contentions, and some of them of a kind which threw the whole empire of Rome into commotion. It is true indeed, that these ancient Liturgies did not agree in all their minute particulars; but they all agreed in proving the point under consideration, so far as the practice of the Churches was concerned; and therefore, we are enabled, from this source of information, confidently to assert, that in about four hundred years after the death of St. John, at which period the worship of the various parts of Christendom first saw the light, they were all, without exception, regulated by a set form, resembling our own at the present day; and it does not appear that there was a single Church which worshipped extemporaneously amongst them.

Now I ask any mind of common intelligence, to account for this fact, upon Presbyterian or Congregational principles. If the Apostles had planted the Church, as some suppose, in the extemporaneous mode of worship, how should they all have become Liturgical in four hundred years? How

does it happen that we should have no account of such a serious change? How are we to imagine that any human influence could have effected it, when we see, that after the conversion of the Emperor Constantine, all his power was unable to put down Arianism, or bring the Christian world to peace? Besides, it must be remembered, that we have a very full history of ecclesiastical affairs, written by Eusebius, within about two hundred years from the death of St. John, and that from his time, at least, every event of importance in the Church, is matter of history. Yet no account of any such revolution can be found.

In order to estimate aright, the force of this evidence, let us only imagine what a clamor would be raised, if any man or set of men should try to introduce Liturgies amongst our Presbyterian or Congregational brethren. Let any degree of practicable human management be used to change their habits on this subject, and I venture to say that if the attempt succeeded at all, it would be but partially, and at the cost of an open and bitter schism. How wild then is the supposition that such an alteration could have taken place in the Primitive Church, without noise, without opposition, yea, so quietly and so much in the dark, that not one line remains to testify the fact to after ages. And yet this comparison does not do justice to the case; because, if the Apostles had set the Church in the extemporaneous mode, that very circumstance would have insured a far more violent opposition against any effort to change it. Christians would have rejected the proposal of a Liturgy, not merely for the reasons of our Presbyterian and Congregational brethren,— because they were not used to it, and therefore disliked it,— but they would have placed their opposition upon the strong ground of Apostolic sanction; and surely, no human power