lefs apt to promote the knowledge and fenfe of religion, than free prayer.

We mean not to affert, fays he, that ferious practical religion must neceffarily fink and perifh under a form of prayer. It is fufficient to our purpose, if free prayer hath in this refpect the advantage of forms; and to be convinced that it has fo, let us attend a little to the nature and tendency of the mode in itfelf, and to fact and obfervation. As to the former, free prayer dces in its own nature tend to increase the furniture of the mind, and warm the affections of the heart, whether we lead the public devotions in the free way, or join in them. If we lead the public devotions in this way, all the furniture of the mind is on feveral occafions brought into ufe, and a clofe attention is neceffary to its being used in a proper and becoming manner. Our minds muft labour after an acquaintance with fpiritual and divine things, to lay in furniture for the duty; and when furnifhed in any good measure for it, cannot without diligent ferious attention engage in the performance of it to advantage. If we join the public devotions in this way, we cannot in any measure fulfil our duty, without giving a close, ferious, and fixed attention to his words, who is our mouth to God, nor can we, while hanging as it were upon the lips of the speaker, fo cafily let down or relax our attention, as if we were hearing or repeating a form, the cuftomarinefs whereof, might difpofe us to pass over it with a fuperficial glance of thought, just as in reviewing a book, we have often read before, we are prone to run haftily over the pages, and attend to the general contents of every chapter only, without that particular attention we might be inclined to bestow upon it at firft reading As without attention, there can be no devotion, fo that, which is a means to help us in our attention, is certainly ferviceable to promote our devotion; and that conceived prayer is a means to engage our attention, we know by our own experience. Now the great things of religion, which we make the matter of our prayers, do greatly need to be better attended to, in order to their being more powerfully felt and practically improved; and confequently that mode of devotion must be beft, and moft conducive to ferious practical religion, which tends moft to excite and fix the attention. Befides, are there not charms in novelty and variety, that at once please and affect the human mind, and fo far as free prayer admits thefe charms, it is much more likely to please and affect than forms. Human nature is the fame in prayer as in other things; and it is to no purpofe to fay, we fhould never be weary of a good thing, merely because it is not new, or not different from what we had feen or known before; for, though we may not be fo weary as to loath it, if it be good in itfelf, yet it cannot invite

or

any

or engage the fame degree of attention, nor yield the fame relifh of delight. On the whole, if attention and affection are of importance in religion, or are proper to advance and promote it, free prayer, as tending to engage them, is of great advantage to the caufe and intereft of practical piety in the world.'

As the first part of this treatise was drawn up with a view to the cafe of introducing liturgies amongst diffenters, the Author closes it, with addreffing the following queries to the minifters and people of that denomination :

1. Whether ferious vital religion is more likely to flourish among diffenters by introducing liturgic worship, than in the way of free prayer?

2. Whether the diffenters of the prefent age have not loft much of the ferious fpirit and character, which is fo effential to the grace, and fo helpful to the gift of prayer, and therefore feek refuge in forms?

3. Whether the neglect of family-religion now too common among them, be not one evidence of the decay of serious piety?

4. Whether forms did not take place in the Chriftian church, after the primitive spirit was departed from it, and whether they were not followed by numberless corruptions?

5. Whether the plainnefs and fimplicity of divine worship can be long maintained in the univerfal ufe of forms, or whether various ceremonies of human device, have not generally gone along with them, or in due time followed, as a proper appendage to them?

6. Whether the credit of the miniftry is likely to be kept up in the use of forms; and whether those who are thought unfit to lead the public devotions without a form of other men's devifing, have not loft much ground in the efteem of the people?

7. Whether the old diffenters will not dwindle more and more under the use of forms, while the methodists in the use of free prayer will draw greater numbers from their congregations, than they have ever yet done?

8. Whether a liturgical worship will not difunite diffenters more and more; and as it is morally certain, they will not all join in one form; whether a variety of forms will not caufe odious comparifons, and split them into as many parties as there are different forms compofed in ufum Londini, Eboraci, Mancunii, Leverpoliæ, &c.?

9. Whether a diffenting liturgy, ftanding as a rival to that by law established, will not be more offenfive to their neighbours than free prayer, and rather hinder than promote the coalition of church and diffenters ??

We have now given a pretty full view of what is contained in the first part of the treatife now before us, and must refer fuch

of

of our Readers as have any defire of knowing what is advanced, in the fecond, to the work itself.

R.

The Morality of the Eaft; extracted from the Koran of Mohammed: digefted under alphabetical Heads. With an Introduction, and eccafional Remarks. Small 8vo. 2 s. fewed. Nicoll.

E

VER fince the publication of the late learned Mr. Sale's edition of the Koran, in this country, it hath been a kind of fashion with men of a certain turn of fentiment, to cry up, and recommend, the Mohammedan difpenfation. Their view in doing this, is obvious enough; and therefore we, as Chriftians, fhould be cautious how we liften to their fpecious infinuations, in favour of other schemes of religion or morality, to the diminution of that honour or that zeal which are due to the fuperior worth and unparalelled excellence of our own.-Candour, nevertheless, must allow, that there is much truth and propriety in the obfervation with which the Compiler of this little fynopfis of the Mohammedan fyftem begins his introductory difcourfe:

In order, fays he, to form a proper judgment of men and things, it will be incumbent on us to generalize our ideas, to extend them beyond the contemplation of our own countrymen, the profeffors of the fame religious principles, and beyond local modes of thinking: to mankind collectively, and subjects abftractedly; overlooking the feveral denominations by which humankind are broken into independent communities, and feparate brotherhoods; whether by the barriers of nature, the policy of governments, or mere obftinate tenacity of particular opinions.'

6

As it feems to be no part of our Editor's defign, to convert us to the Mohammedan faith, but merely to prefent us with a compendium of Eastern morality, of a more modern date than the Bible, in order to enlarge our Ideas, and extend our candour and charity to different perfuafions; fo he previously remarks, that, to form an impartial eftimate of the intrinfic merits of any religion, it may be neceffary to pafs over all the fupernaturals wherewith it is embellifhed, and recommended to the veneration of its votaries; and to examine the tendency of thofe practical duties enjoined for the conduct of man toward man: this is the infallible teft, the golden rule, laid down by our Meffiah, and brought home to the apprehenfions of thofe to whom it is addrefled, by a familiar and moft happy allufion. We are not only invited to judge for ourselves what is right; but are referred to a fruit tree as a guide to our judgment: Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thifiles? Even fo every good

tree

tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evi fruit,-Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them."

.

The very fenfible Editor of this little Turkish manual of moral precepts, thus proceeds to explain the scheme, and apologize for the nature of his prefent undertaking. It is hoped, fays he, this publication may not be misconstrued, or misreprefented, into a defign to recommend Mohammedifm to Chriftians; or in any measure to fet the Koran in competition with the Holy Scriptures: God be thanked we are not reduced to derive our morals from any fuch fource; as having the fuperior advantage and infinite happiness of* drinking the waters of life from a purer ftream! The only view was, by undergoing a piece of drudgery, to prefent the public with what may at least be esteemed a curiofity by numbers who might be difgufted with the toil of acquiring it, viz. from a heap of jargon to extract and throw into a concise view, the moral maxims of an Arab, whofe dictates have been received by fuch extenfive regions, in the fairest and most delightful quarter of the globe. May one farther motive be tolerated? The operations of that zeal, which is not according to knowledge, are fo violent in fome, contract the operations of the mind into fo narrow a circle, and warp the judgment fo far from the truth; that we ought to pray for that degree of Laodicean lukewarmness, which may preferve to us the free and perfect ufe of our rational faculties and there are many fincere and well meaning people, to whom it may be fome information, to find that muffulmen, although painted with fuch fierce whiskers on fign pofts at inn doors, are taught by their law, understand, and practice, the moral duties; to a degree that may fhame many who profess a better religion this compilation may therefore not be without its ufe in extending that charity of opinion toward our fellow creatures, which is fo little understood, though it conftitutes fo fundamental an article of the Chriftian religion.'

Our Author now goes on, by way of farther introduction, to lay before his Readers a compendious view of the life and conduct of that fubtil Arabian genius, whofe pretended miffion from heaven caufed fo prodigious a revolution on earth! This account is chiefly borrowed from Mr. Maclaine's excellent tranflation of the learned Dr. Mofheim's ecclefiaftical history; of which we lately made ample mention in fome of our Reviews. At the clofe of this extract from Dr. Mofheim, he introduces: the following remark from Tournefort:

"Of all falfe religions, the Mahometan is the most dangerous, because it not only ftrongly flatters the fenfes, but in many points alfo agrees with Chriftianity. Mahometifm is founded.

The words printed in Italics, are inferted in the place of a parenthefis which we have omitted, as referring to a quotation from another writer, not here extracted.

on the knowledge of the true God, the Creator of all things, upon the love of our neighbour, the purification of the body, and a quiet peaceable life. It abhors idols, and the worship of them is strictly prohibited."

To this laft quotation, our Editor fubjoins the following fingular conjecture, which we fhall tranfcribe, and leave to the Reader's animadverfion :

Indeed Mohammed, fays he, appears to have been a zealous afferter of the unity of Deity; taking frequent occafion throughout the Koran to infift on it as the fundamental point of religion, and to denounce fevere vengeance against thofe who affociate other names or relations with God. If it may be pardonable to indulge a little in conjecture, it may not appear perhaps the moft abfurd that has been hazarded, when we reflect how extenfive the spread of Mohammedifm has been, if we attribute fomewhat of that reformation from Romish idolatry, the feeds of which continued taking root, long before they were cultivated for political purposes; to the indirect influence of the doctrine of the unity of the great God of the univerfe, who is truly, if, in an erroneous manner, the pure object of eastern adoration. That this conjecture may not be laughed out of countenance, without fomething farther being urged to apologife for making it; the Reader is requested to confider, that while the Christian world were daily worthipping and eating their God in the form and fubftance of a cake; while they were debafing and wafting their rational powers on fcholaftic fubtilties, founded in abfurdity; the Afiatics adored a God whom they were taught to conceive in these terms-God! there is no God but he; the living, the selffubfifting; neither flumber nor fleep feizeth him; to him belongeth whatsoever is in heaven, and on earth. Who is he that can intercede with him, but through his good pleasure? He knoweth that which is paft, and that which is to come to them, and they fhall not comprehend any thing of his knowledge, but fo far as he pleaseth. His throne is extended over heaven and earth, and the prefervation of both is no burthen unto him. He is the high, the mighty." Thefe are expreffions which muft ftrike with their fublimity, even those who despise the Arabian apoftle that dictated them.

Were it neceffary to enter into a comparison between the Mohammedan fyftem and popery, a thinking man would not hefitate long in deciding to which the preference was due : for to inftance only in another particular; whereas the penances and atonements for fins in the latter, are chiefly directed to ufelefs rituals, and unprofitable mortifications; the expiations of the former have generally a benevolent direction to the good of fociety; as to the freeing the captive, to feeding and cloathing the hungry, &c. See fome inftances of this kind, under

the