Letter; because, it never was a Question with ́ me, whether Prayer be a Duty of natural Morality?Whether an Obligation to the Performance of it, will not arife from the natural • Relation and Fitness of Things?—Whether we 'be obliged, from fuch a Relation and Fitness, as rational Creatures, to perform it?—If the Duty be, what I readily acknowledge it to be, in itself, a natural Means of promoting Religion and Virtue; thence neceffarily follows its natural Morality, its natural Fitness, and its natural Obligation upon us, as rational Crea<tures. Thus far, my good Friend, you and I are at a perfect Agreement ;-But, now, we muft differ; not a little, but widely ;-For, in a another Part of your Letter, you wave' "the Confideration of its natural Fitness, as a Means of Religion and Virtue, and state the Question exactly as I have done, but have not, as 1 conceive, prov'd the Point in Question. -You there fay you will not confider the natural Fitness of Prayer, as a Means to an End, but as having in it a Fitnefs of CONGRUITY, arifing from the natural Relation between God and Man, or, (as I exprefs'd it) between us dependent, and finful Creatures, and God the • Creator and Fudge; affirming, that it is fit and congruous that we fhould acknowledge to Him, our Dependency and Sinfulness; and that, without making fuch an Acknowledgment, we fhould not act as it naturally becomes Beings "to do, who stand in fuch a Relation. This is the Thing that I wanted, and do still want,

'to

.

to fee prov'd. But, good Sir, I must firft take the Liberty (I with you may not think that I take too much Liberty to deny your Diftinction between a Fitness of Means to an • End, and a Fitnefs of Congruity, they being, according to my Apprehenfion, fynonymous Terms. Whatever has a Fitness in it as a • Means to an End, muft, likewife, have a Fitnefs of Congruity: For, pray Sir, confider, attentively, what you mean by Congruity: If you mean any thing, certainly you must mean an Aptness, or Suitableness, in fuch an Action, to anfwer fuch a Purpose, or to produce fuch an Effect. If there be a Congruity (for Inftance) between a State of Dependence upon the fupreme Being, and an Acknowledgement, to Him, of that Dependence, it must be for fome Reafon that it is fit for us fo to behave. Now, what is this Reafon, which conftitutes the Fitnefs of Congruity in this Cafe? It can be nothing different from the End, or Defign, intended to be anfwer'd by fuch an Action; they are the fame Thing. This Reason, then, or End, for which the Action ought to be perform'd, muft relate to God, or to us; that is, if it be fit and congruous that dependent Creatures should acknowledge fuch their Dependency, to Him, on whom they depend, it must be for one of these Reasons, i. e. for one of these Ends, or Purpofes, either, that we may be benefited, or that God may receive fome Advantage, or Pleasure, from our De-. votions, fimply confider'd. Your Argument

excludes

• excludes all Regard to the Influence that Prayer C may have upon us, or any Good that it may do us; and, confequently, in this way of Reafoning, from our Relation to God, fimply confidered, whatever Fitness there is in it, whatever good End can be answer'd by this Act, it muft wholly respect him to whom we pray; and if it refpects God (which the present Argument fuppofes) he must be some way, or other, benefited by it; which, in my Opinion, is a most blafphemous Suppofition. The Thing appears to me in fo very clear and ftrong a Light, that it requires no Authorities. to fupport it; but I fhall call in three great Writers to my Affistance. The great and good Dr. Scott, in his Chriftian Life, Vol. I. P. 4. Expreffes himself thus, "God's effential

Glory is fo immenfe and fecure, that we can "do nothing to encrease, or diminish it; and no "other Glory can redound to him from with

out, but what is the Reflection of his own "natural Rays. He understands himself too well to value himself either more, or lefs, for "the Praises, or Difpraises of his Creatures. He "is enough of Stage and Theatre to himself, " and hath the fame fatisfying Profpect of his own Glory in the midst of all the loud Blafphemies of Hell, as among the perpetual Hallelujahs of Heaven. And, having fo, it cannot be fuppofed that he should enjoin us to praife and glorify him for the fake of any "Good, or Advantage, that may accrue to himfelf by it, or out of any other Pleasure that

"

"he

he takes in hearing himself applauded by us, "than in any other Act that is reasonable in "its own Nature; but it is therefore he will

have us praise him because he knows that it " is for OUR Good, and highly conduces, as it " is a moft reafonable Action, to the Perfection "and Happiness of our reasonable Natures; be

caufe our praifing him naturally excites us to "imitate him, and to transcribe into our own "Natures thofe adorable Perfections' which we "do admire and extol in his. Archbishop

Tillotson fhall be my next Voucher-Speaking of the goodness of God, p. 681, he fays, "It " is great Condefcenfion and Goodnefs in God to accept of our Acknowledgements of his Benefits, of our imperfect Praifes, and ignorant "Admiration of him; and were he not as won"derfully good, as he is great and glorious, he "would not fuffer us to fully his great and glo"rious Name, by taking it into our Mouths.:

The other is Dr. Clagget, on the Lord's Prayer, the Introduction to it, where he fays," God "is fo infinitely above us that it feemeth to look "like Arrogance and Pride for us, fo much as "to prefume to speak to him." And this feems to hold ftill ftronger, when we confider ourfelves as Sinners. Our natural Imperfections, when compared with the infinitely glorious and perfect God, throw us at fuch an immenfe Diftance from him, as cannot avoid ftriking us with fuch an awful Reverence as 'may make us fearful of approaching him; but, when we confider ourselves as Rebels, as hav

.

་

ing offended against fo much Goodness, and provok'd fo much Power, instead of thinking it fit and congruous, from this our dreadful Relation to him, to appear before him, it would more naturally overwhelm our guilty Minds 'with Confufion and Terror, that, like Adam

.

.

and Eve in Paradife, we fhould chufe, rather, C to hide ourselves from his Prefence. To which purpose I fhall quote another very pertinent Paffage from Dr. Scot, p. 204. "Next to banishing us from his Prefence for ever, the "moft effectual Course that God could take to abafe us, was to exclude us from all immediate "Intercourfe with him, and not to admit of any Addreffes, or Supplications from us, but only thro' the Hands of a Mediator; which is a plain Demonftration how infinitely pure "he is, and how bafe and vile our Sins have render'd us; infomuch, that he will not suffer a Sinner to come near him, but by a Proxy; that he will not accept of a Service from a guilty Hand, nor liften to a Prayer from a finful Mouth, 'till it is firft hallowed and prefented to him by a pure and holy Mediator."

It is not only justifiable, but commendable, in us, to enquire into the Reasonableness and great • Usefulness of the Duty of Prayer, in exciting, ' and improving, and propagating proper Sentiments and Difpofitions. This may help to recommend the Practice of it, and make us the more constant and earnest in fuch holy Exercises. But, our principal Care must be to poffefs our Minds with the strongest Sense

24

• of