ship, called High Places, which were in use both before and after the building of the temple. In the early ages of the world, the devotion of mankind seems to have delighted greatly in groves, woods, and mountains, not only because these retired places were naturally fitted for contemplation, but probably also because they kindled a certain sacred dread in the mind of the worshipper. It is certain that nothing was more antient in the East, than altars surrounded by groves and trees, which made the place very shady and delightful in those hot countries. The idolaters in the first ages of the world, who generally worshipped the sun, appear to have thought it improper to straiten and confine the supposed infiniteness of this imaginary deity within walls, and therefore they generally made choice of hills and mountains, as the most convenient places for their idolatry; and when in after-times they had brought in the use of temples, yet for a long time they kept them open-roofed. Nay, the patriarchs themselves, who worshipped the true God, generally built their altars near to some adjacent grove of trees, which, if nature denied, were usually planted by the religious in those days. When Abraham dwelt at Beersheba, in the plains of Mamre, it is said, He planted a grove there, and called upon the name of the Lord the everlasting God (Gen. xxi. 33.), and doubtless that was the place to which the patriarch and his family resorted for public worship.'

But at length these hills and groves of the heathen idolaters, as they were more retired and shady, became so much the fitter for the exercise of their diabolical rites, and for the commission of the obscene and horrid practices that were usually perpetrated there; for they came at length to be places purposely set apart for prostitution. In many passages of Scripture it is recorded of the Israelites (who in this respect imitated the heathens) that they secretly did the things which were not right, that they set up images and groves in every high hill, and under every green tree, and there burnt incense in all the high places, and wrought wickedness to provoke the Lord, as did the heathen. (2 Kings xvii. 9-13.) On this account therefore God expressly commanded the Israelites, that they should utterly destroy all the places wherein the nations of Canaan, whose land they should possess, served their gods upon the high mountains and upon the hills ; and to pay their devotions and bring their oblations to that place only which God should choose. (Deut. xii. 2-15.) Nay, to prevent every approach to the idolatrous customs of the heathens, they were forbidden to plant any trees near the altar of the Lord. (Deut. xvi. 21.)

It was not therefore from any dislike of hills or groves, that God prohibited the offering of sacrifices there, or that pious kings so zealously suppressed and destroyed them, but because God intended to keep up an unity in the place of worship among his people, (at least in sacrificing) as the best preservative against idolatry: for

1 Many antient nations used to erect altars and offer sacrifices to their gods upon high places and mountains. See the examples adduced in Burder's Oriental Literature, vol. i. p. 233.

as the Israelites were a people naturally inclined to go a whoring after other gods, and were under great temptations of doing so, from the practice of the Canaanites who lived among them, and were gross idolaters, it gave them too visible an advantage of following these abominations, when every one was at liberty to offer sacrifices where he pleased, and without proper restrictions in the way and manner of doing it. And as the imitation of the heathens in their places of worship was one step towards their idolatry, so it was a considerable advance towards the commission of all the gross obscenities, which these places of darkness and obscurity afforded; and we may readily conclude that if once they fell into the same religion, they would also fall into the same immoral practices which that religion taught them to be acceptable to their gods. Now, that wickedness of the grossest sort did attend the idolatrous worship in such places, is sufficiently evident from 1 Kings xv. 12. 2 Kings xxiii. 7. Rom. i. 21. 28., &c.

It is therefore clear from the command of God, so pathetically enforced in the above-cited text, (Deut. xii. 2-15.) that after God should fix upon a place for his public worship, it was entirely unlawful to offer sacrifices upon high places, or any where else but in the place God did choose: so that after the building of the temple, the prohibition of high places and groves (so far at least as concerned the sacrificing in them) unquestionably took place. And it was for their disobedience to this command, by their sacrificing upon high places and in groves, even after the temple was erected (2 Kings xv. 35.), and for not destroying the high places of the heathens, where their idol gods were worshipped, which by that command and in many other places of Scripture (Numb. xxxiii. 52.), they were expressly appointed to do;-that the prophets with so much holy zeal reproached the Israelites. We have indeed several instances in Scripture besides that of Abraham, where the prophets and other good men are said to have made use of these high places for sacrificing, as well as other less solemn acts of devotion, and which are not condemned. Thus, Samuel, upon the uncertain abode of the ark, fitted up a place of devotion for himself and his family in a high place, and built an altar there, and sacrificed upon it. (1 Sam. ix. 12. 19. 25.) Gideon also built an altar and offered a sacrifice to God upon the top of a rock (Judg. vi. 25, 26.); and the tabernacle itself was removed to the high place that was at Gibeon. (1 Chron. xvi. 39. and xxi. 29.) But all this was before the temple was erected, which was the first fixed place that God appointed for his public worship; after which other places for sacrificing became unlawful.

That the Israelites, both kings and people, offered sacrifices upon these high places even after the temple was built, will evidently appear by noticing a few passages in their history; for (not to mention Jeroboam and his successors in the kingdom of Israel, whose professed purpose was to innovate every thing in matters of religion, and who had peculiar priests whom they termed prophets of the groves,

1 Kings xviii. 19.), it is clear that most of the kings of Judah,-even such of them who were otherwise zealous for the observance of the law, are expressly recorded as blameable on this head, and but few have the commendation given them of destroying these high places. No sooner had Rehoboam the son of Solomon, after the revolt of the ten tribes from him, strengthened himself in his kingdom, but we read that Judah did evil in the sight of the Lord, and built them high places, and images, and groves, on every high hill, and under every green tree. (1 Kings xiv. 22, 23.)

In the reign of Asa, his grandson, things took another turn, for of him it is said, that he took away the altars of the strange gods, and the high places, and brake down the images, and cut down the groves (2 Chron. xiv. 3.), even without sparing those of his mother (xv. 16.), which passage seems to be contradicted by 1 Kings xv. 14. It should, however, be recollected, that there were two kinds of high places, one frequented even by devout worshippers who lived at a distance from Jerusalem, and made use of by them in sacrificing, and for other religious purposes; and which were tolerated contrary to the divine command by such of their kings who otherwise are said to be pious princes. The other kind of high places were such as were considered as abominable from their first institution, and made the receptacle of idolatry and wickedness. These last were the high places which Asa took away; but those where God alone was worshipped, had obtained so long, and were looked upon with so sacred a veneration, that for fear of giving a general offence he did not venture to abolish them. But however well-meaning the pious intentions of good people in this respect were, yet the conduct of their kings was highly blameable in giving the least countenance to it, as being contrary to the divine command. The truth is, these high places were famous either for the apparition of angels, or some other miraculous event, had either been places of abode for the ark of the Lord, or those in which some prophet or patriarch of old had been accustomed to pray and sacrifice, and therefore they were regarded as consecrated to the service of God; nor was there strength enough in the government to overcome this inveterate prejudice, till Hezekiah and Josiah arose, who (to prevent the calamities that were coming on the nation) had the courage to effect a thorough reformation.

Towards the conclusion of Asa's reign, when he grew more infirm in body, and perhaps more remiss in the cause of God, it appears that these wicked high places began to be renewed; for it is said of Jehoshaphat his son, that he took away the high places and groves out of Judah (2 Chron. xvii. 6.), which after all we must understand, either of his having given orders only to have them taken away, or having seen it done but in part, without totally removing such as devout worshippers frequented; for afterwards, when his character comes to be summed up, there is this reservation (possibly more through the fault of his subjects than himself,) howbeit the high places were not taken away. (2 Chron. xx. 32.)

Of Jehoshaphat's son and successor Jehoram, it is said, that he made high places in the mountains of Judah. (2 Chron. xxi. 11.) And though Joash, one of his sons, set out well, yet in the latter part of his life he was perverted by his idolatrous courtiers, who served groves and idols, to whom it appears he gave a permission for that purpose; for after making their obeisance we are told, that he hearkened to them, and then they left the house of God. (2 Chron. xxiv. 17, 18.) Nor was the reign of Amaziah the son of Joash any better, for still the people sacrificed and burnt incense on the high places (2 Kings xiv. 4.); and though Uzziah his son is said to have done that which was right in the sight of God, yet this exception appears against him, that the high places were not removed, but the people still sacrificed there (2 Kings xv. 3, 4.); the same observation is made of Jotham and Ahaz. (2 Chron. xxviii. 4.) But Hezekiah who succeeded him was a prince of extraordinary piety: he removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves (2 Kings xviii. 4.), which his son Manasseh again built up. (2 Kings xxi. 2.) At length good king Josiah, a prince very zealous for the true religion, utterly cleared the land from the high places and groves, and purged it from idolatry: but as the four succeeding reigns before the Babylonian captivity were very wicked, we may presume that the high places were again revived, though there is no mention of them after the reign of Josiah.

II. From the preceding facts and remarks, however, we are not to conclude, that the prohibition relating to high places and groves, which extended chiefly to the more solemn acts of sacrificing there, did on any account extend to the prohibiting of other acts of devotion, particularly prayer, in any other place besides the temple, the high places and groves of the heathen (which were ordered to be rased) only excepted. For we learn from the sacred writings, that prayers are always acceptable to God in every place, when performed with a true and sincere devotion of heart, which alone gives life and vigour to our religious addresses. And therefore it was that in many places of Judæa, both before and after the Babylonian captivity, we find mention made in the Jewish and other histories of places built purposely for prayer, and resorted to only for that end, called proseucha or oratories.

These places of worship were very common in Judæa (and it should seem in retired mountainous or elevated places) in the time of Christ; they were also numerous at Alexandria, which was at that time a large and flourishing commercial city, inhabited by vast numbers of Jews and it appears that in heathen countries they were erected in sequestered retreats, commonly on the banks of rivers, or on the sea-shore. The proseucha or oratory at Philippi, where the Lord opened the heart of Lydia, that she attended unto the things which were spoken by Paul, was by a river side. (Acts xvi. 13, 14. 16.) And Josephus has preserved the decree of the city of Halicarnassus, permitting the Jews to erect oratories, part of which is in the following terms:-"We ordain, that the Jews who are willing, both

men and women, do observe the sabbaths and perform sacred rites according to the Jewish law, and build proseuche by the sea-side, according to the custom of their country; and if any man, whether magistrate or private person, give them any hindrance or disturbance, he shall pay a fine to the city."1

It is a question with some learned men, whether these proseuche were the same as the synagogues (of which an account will be found in the following section), or distinct edifices from the latter. Both Josephus and Philo, to whom we may add Juvenal, appear to have considered them as synonymous; and with them agree Grotius, Ernesti, Drs. Whitby, Doddridge, and Lardner; but Calmet, Drs. Prideaux and Hammond, and others, have distinguished between these two sorts of buildings, and have shown that though they were nearly the same, and were sometimes confounded by Philo and Josephus, yet that there was a real difference between them; the synagogues being in cities, while the proseucha were without the walls, in sequestered spots, and (particularly in heathen countries) were usually erected on the banks of rivers, or on the sea-shore (Acts xvi. 13.), without any covering but galleries or the shade of trees. Dr. Prideaux thinks the proseucha were of greater antiquity than the synagogues, and were formed by the Jews in open courts, in order that those persons who dwelt at a distance from Jerusalem might offer up their private prayers in them as they were accustomed to do in the courts of the temple or of the tabernacle. In the synagogues, he further observes, the prayers were offered up in public forms, while the proseucha were appropriated to private devotions: and from the oratory, where our Saviour spent a whole night in prayer, being erected on a mountain (Luke vi. 12.), it is highly probable that these proseucha were the same as the high places, so often mentioned in the Old Testament.3

SECTION IV.

OF THE SYNAGOGUES.

1. Nature and Origin of Synagogues.-The Synagogue of the Libertines explained.-II. Form of the Synagogues.-III. The Officers or Ministers.-IV. The Service performed in the Synagogues.-V. On what Days performed. VI. Ecclesiastical Power of the Synagogues.-VII. The Shemoneh Esreh, or Nineteen Prayers used in the Synagogue Service.

1. THE Synagogues were buildings in which the Jews assembled for prayer, reading and hearing the Sacred Scriptures, and other

1 Josephus, Ant. Jud. lib. xiv. c. 10. (al. 24.)

2 Philode Legatione ad Caium, p. 1011. Josephus de vita sua. $54. Juvenal, Sat. iii. 14. Grotius, Whitby, and Doddridge on Luke vi. 12. Ernesti Institutio Interpretis Novi Testamenti, pp. 363, 364. edit. 4to. 1792. Lardner's Credibility, book i c. ii. § 3. Dr. Harwood's Introduction to the New Testament, vol. 2. pp. 171–180 3 Dr. Hammond on Luke vi. 12. and Acts xvi. 13-16. Calmet's Dict. voce Proseucha. Prideaux's Connection, part i. book vi. sub anno 444. vol. i. pp. 357390. edit. 1720.