fible token, of voluntary difcipleship to Chrift, Matthew xxviii. 19. And the Lord's Supper feems intended to awaken, and keep alive, upon the minds of Chrift's followers, a just and worthy fenfe of the beautiful character of their mafter, Luke xxii. 19. To which we may add the washing of feet, which feems to bear fome refemblance to a pofitive institution; this feems designed, and intended, to imprefs ftrongly, upon the minds of Chrift's difciples, a fense of that friendly and brotherly behaviour, (even to the perfonal performance of the meaneft offices in life) which he defired they would exercife, one to another, as bearing the character of his disciples; of which he gave it them in charge, that, in this particular, they were to imitate him; fuppofing it to be greatly prepofterous for the fervants, or difciples, to be above any thing that was not below their lord and mafter, John xiii. 4-17. Thefe, I think, are the principal of those pofitive inftitutions, which, with us, are confidered to be of a divine original.

As to prayer, a queftion may arife, whether it is a part of natural religion, or whether it is to be considered as a positive infiitution,

T3

tution or something of like kind? which question, perhaps, may much more eafily be asked, than answered. If prayer be confidered as a part of natural religion, then, it seems to fuppofe that God not only hears, but also that he answers the requests of his creatures, by giving them what they pray for, if the request be reasonable and for the petitioner's good, and that this is generally the cafe; I fay, this feems to be supposed, because, otherwife, perhaps, we fhall be at a lofs to discover what there is, in nature, to be a proper ground for prayer, so as to render it a part of natural religion. For, if God does not answer any of our requefts, by giving us what we pray for; then, the question will be, why do we make those requests? or what respect is shewn to the Deity, by asking him for what is not to be obtained by afking? or, if only a few, viz. fome particulars requested, will be granted; then, the question will be, why fhould we pray for all forts of favours, or, indeed, for any favours at all? feeing we have no rule, by which we can judge what particular favours will be vouchfafed to each individual, nor at what particular time those favours that are to be vouchfafed will be granted

granted to the petitioner; so that, in this view of the case, prayer, at best, is like shootingat rovers, in which, poffibly, there may be ten thousand to one against the petitioner. If the above supposition be admitted, viz. that God does, in general, answer the requests of his creatures, by giving them what they pray for, when the request is reasonable and for the petitioners good; then, it may well be expected, that the truth of this fuppofition is abundantly made evident, by conftant and daily experience and fact, seeing there are a multitude of petitions, conftantly and daily put up to the Deity; but then, this involves us in fuch difficulties, as feem, at least, to be unfurmountable; because, to appearance, conftant and daily experience and fact are against us, there being a multitude of prayers, conftantly and daily put up to God, of which there does not appear to be any ground for fuppofing that those prayers are answered, tho' what is prayed for feems proper for the petitioners to ask, and for God to give, quent petitions are put up, by people, to the Deity, that he

Thus, fre

pious good

would fo

dispose the minds of the Kings and Rulers of mankind, as that thofe Rulers may become

good men, and may rule the people in righteousness; which requests, as the good of mankind is greatly interested in them, fo, furely, they are both fit to be asked and anfwered, fuppofing the changing or turning men's hearts to be a part of that providential government that God exercifes among the children of men; and yet, notwithstanding the multitude and the frequent repetitions of these requests, the Potentates of the earth, in general, feem to go on in their own way, which, God knows, is bad enough. And, tho' pious people are willing to fuppofe that they frequently experience the answer to prayer, as they daily receive a Supply of their daily wants, according to the requests which they have daily put up to the Deity, in that behalf; yet, in this, the prefumption lies ftrong against them; for, as the fupply takes place, by and through the ordinary course of things, without any particular divine interpofition, fo there is just ground for prefuming that the cafe would have been just the fame, whether the petitioner had prayed to God, or not. When two armies are going to engage in a battle, each army puts up it's petition to God to give them the victory; and, whether vic

tory

tory be obtained by one, or the other, it affords a pretence, to the victorious party, that victory to them was the answer to prayer; tho', perhaps, in the next engagement, before which God was equally invoked by each party, the victorious party are routed; and this pretence feems to be as well grounded as most, if not all other pretences of like kind. If it should be faid, that God has made prayer the condition of his favours ; and, therefore, if we do not ask for what we want, we have no reason to expect it, whether God gives it in anfwer to prayer, or not. This affertion must be answered by an interrogation, viz. when, and where did God come to this agreement with his creatures? And if there has been fuch an agreement, then, most certainly, God will perform his part, by giving what is prayed for, when the request is reasonable and for the petitioner's good; but then, this does not appear to be the cafe, in fact, as has been already observed. Chrift indeed promifed his difciples, John xvi. 23. that "whatfoever they fhould afk the father, "in his name, he would give it them." This is a most unbounded promise, tho', I think, it will be but just to limit it as above,

viz.