protestants. They were deemed then to be, as they really are, of minor importance; and, in fact, received their characteristic features, less from the diversity of the hypotheses of the reformers in different countries, than from the political circumstances of the respective nations. They awaken research, without dividing the faithful; and what right views can obseure, perfection will eventually obliterate.

THE following numbers were first published in the "Philadelphian,” of the year 1828, as answers to some remarks under the same title, which appeared in the "Church Register."

LITURGICAL CONSIDERATIONS.

NUMBER I.

THIS title is taken from the Church Register. It, at the same time, points to the cause, and expresses the subject of our inquiries. The alternative being tendered, "Prayer may be called the making known of our wants to a superior being, and our desire to be relieved from them; or, it is "the offering the heart to God;" we accept the latter, because neither angels nor glorified saints can help us, or become mediators. To the objection, that "the Omniscient knows our wants long before they existed," the anonymous writer answers in terms suited to his own creed. We prefer to say the author of all good governs with equal particularity in the kingdoms of providence and grace: in both he adopts means, among which are often the duties assigned to moral agents. Their liberty, being essential to their responsibility, is secure; whilst their voluntary actions are constituents of the general scheme of events. If the prayer of faith be thus a mean to ensure a promised blessing, the grace is certain, and consequently the duty; and the purpose, the fore-knowledge, and the event are equally sure, whilst the duty of praying is not the less incumbent ; and as in every other case, absolute contingency is wholly excluded.

When he says that "private prayer, is that pouring ́out of the heart, which holds the soul in rapt communion with spiritual things;" and afterwards that "this (order) is best effected in public prayer by the use

and adoption of one general form; we feel no other concern, than that the writer would carry his private devotion to the public sanctuary. But when we observed, by the second number, that the aim of the writer was to show that, "the Jews used precomposed and set forms of prayer in their public religious worship;" and that such was "the practice of our blessed Redeemer, and after him, of his disciples;" the two numbers were seen to be perfectly in character for their vehicle, and illy suited to a hemisphere, where liturgies are not rejected by dissenters, but by the mass of the people.

Prayer being the offering up of the desires to God, it is accomplished with or without words; in words which are our own, or another's; or printed or written. There ought, therefore, to be "no degradation, no want of piety, no proof of alienship," imputed to any individual, or denomination, for using "prayers precomposed," nor have we heard of any such thing; but if the ancient Jews and the first Christians used a public liturgy, it would seem that we, who have none, must be the aliens. We have therefore a conceded excuse for parrying this charge by examining its supports.

The first is taken from Exodus xv. the song of Moses and the children of Israel by the Red Sea; "the words and tune of which were arranged and known before all the people joined in it; and therefore it is a set form." This would have been in point, had the question been of singing Psalms. It would also have been relevant, if the lawfulness of set forms in prayer had been denied. But in proof of the use of "precomposed and set forms of prayer in public worship" of the Jews, its bearing is not easily discerned.

Also that the words were previously "known by them all" we are unable to infer from the circumstances. Printing had not been invented-the song consists of nineteen verses, and the thousands of Israel