2. We also grant that it was intended as a Pattern to frame other Prayers by.

3. We do not fay that the prefcribing of this Form fhews all Prayers fuddenly conceived to be unlawful, or implies that they are forbidden.

But that which we pretend is this, That the prefcribing of this Form of Prayer plainly implies the Lawfulness of any Forms; and moreover, that the Ufe of Forms hath fundry Advantages above extemporary Effufions, which are enough to determine a wife Man to prefer the former before the latter. I fhall therefore do these two Things.

1. Prove that our Saviour prefcribed this Form of Prayer, to be used as fuch by his Difciples; and it certainly proves the Lawfulness of Forms, that there is one Form which we are bound in Duty to use. And,

2. Shall fhew the Advantages of Forms of Prayer above the other.

1. That our Saviour prescribed this Prayer, to be used by his Difciples in that Form of Words wherein he deliver'd it.

Before I proceed to the proving of which, I cannot but take notice with fome Trouble to what a State Religion and Christianity is reduced amongst us by Men pretending to Reformation, that we should be put to prove fuch plain Things, and to juftify such an unqueftionable Duty as this is. Should a Bihop or Paftor of the ancient Church have:

spent

fpent a Sermon to prove that the LORD'S Prayer might, and ought to be faid by Chriftians in their Devotions, the People might well have gazed and wondred at it, and faid, who ever made a Question of it? But Things are come to that pass, that one Pretence up on which some Men claim to themselves a purer Worship is, that they have rejected the Ufe of all Forms of Prayer, not excepting THAT which our Saviour himself taught his Difciples. Surely the Lord's Prayer Thould have escaped the Sentence of Condemnation, when they were paffing Judgment upon pretended Superftitions, but their Caufe would not füffer it; for had the Ufe of this Form been left prescribed amongst themselves, it had ftood as a perpetual Rebuke to their rejecting all other Forms, as unfit and unlawful.. As the Cafe therefore ftands, we are obliged to defend the Use of this Prayer, which our Lord HIMSELF prescribed, and to check the growing of that scandalous Error which hath fet it afide.

It is the exprefs Order of our Saviour, that his Difciples fhould use the Prayer he taught them as a Form, for this feems to be the Meaning of thefe Words, After this manner therefore pray ye; no, by fome it is thought After this manner fignifies, to this purpose, and therefore a Form is not here prefcribed; I confefs the Phrase had been clearer if it had been literally rendred, "Ουτως ἂν προστυχες ὑμᾶς,

Pray

Pray ye therefore THUS; tho' even the Expreffion, as it is in our Tranflation (all things confidered) is as if our Lord had faid, Ufe this Form of Prayer, and the reafon is, because it is a Form of Prayer that immediately fol lows thefe Words; for if our Saviour had intended only a Directory for the Matter, it is probable that he would not have recited a Form of Prayer at all, but rather have faid, "When ye pray, pray to your Father which "is in Heaven, that his Name may be hal"lowed, that his Kingdom may come, that "his Will may be done on Earth as it is in "Heaven, &c. after fuch a manner as we know they have done who have difparaged Forms, and prefcribed Directories. But whatever Exception may be taken from these Words in St. Matthew, thofe in St. Luke are plain and home to the Bufinefs, Lake 11. 2. for there we find that when one of our Lord's Difciples defired him to teach them to pray, he faid, "Όταν προσευχηθεί λέγετε, ΠΑΤΕΡ ἡμῶν, &c. When ye pray Say, Our Father, &e. and to fay that Prayer, is nothing elfe, and can be nothing elfe, but to ufe the very Words of it, as they are there prescribed.

2. This feems to be farther clear from hence, that our Lord prefcribed this Prayer to his Disciples at two feveral times, once of his own Accord, at another time when he was asked for Inftruction how to pray; for he taught this Prayer when he preached to

his Disciples from the Mount, which St. Matthew here gives us an Account of; and again, when one of his Difciples came to him and faid, Lord, teach us to pray, as John alfo taught his Difciples, as we read in the forequoted 11th Chapter of St. Luke, ver. 1, 2. Now I fhould think it is very plain from hence that our Saviour's Intention was to prefcribe a Form of Prayer, because otherwife he had the fecond time at leaft either given them a Form in other Words, or rather no Form of Words at all, but had only inftructed them in the Matter of Prayer, left by twice giving them the fame Prayer he had led them into this Miftake, that they were to fay this very Prayer in their ordinary Devotions; this is fo preffing an Argument, that' they of the other Side have scarce any way to avoid it, but by pretending that it is not the fame Prayer in St. Luke which we find in St. Matthere; for fay they there is this Di verfity of Expreffion in the one from the other, that the Petition which in St. Matthew is thus expreffed, Forgive us our Debts, as we forgive our Debtors, is in St. Luke thus expreffed, And forgive us our Sins, for we al fo forgive every one that is indebted to us; but this is a poor Cavil, and may be answered! thus; that if the difference of two or three Words, where not only the Senfe, but the manner of Expreffion is the fame, may feem to argue any thing against the Lord's Prayer

as

as a Form, then the great Conformity in the Words and Expreffion in both Places do more ftrongly argue that it was intended as a Form, especially if this be confidered, that there are hardly any Forms of Speaking any where twice repeated in Scripture, in which there is a greater Conformity and Sameness of Words than in the Lord's Prayer, as we find it in St. Matthew, and in St. Luke. Surely then it was not for nothing that at different Times, and upon two different Occafions, our Lord ftill taught this Prayer, and that it hath ftood fo whole and entire in two Evangelifts. And what elfe can be inferr'd from it, than that our Saviour intended his Difciples fhould take notice, that this Form of Prayer, which he once taught them upon the Mount, he would not depart from? Therefore when he was asked afterwards to teach his Difciples to pray, he gave them no other than he did at firft. As to the Obfervation concerning the Doxology being added in St. Matthew, and left out in St. Luke, I need fay no more, than that these Words, For thine is the Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory, for ever and ever, were an ufual Conclufi on of Prayer in the Synagogue, and therefore it was not needful to express it above

once.

3. It is to be confidered that our Saviour taught his Difciples this Prayer in St. Luke D ироп