Forms of Prayer are set prayers, prepared to be used in worship, public and private. As to the pro- priety and utility of such forms there has been much dispute. The arguments are about as follows.
I. From Scrij)ture. — (1.) On the one hand it is as- serted against the use of forms that '• there is not the slightest tracj in all the New Testament of any estab- lished liturgical service of Christian worship. There are no forms of prayer prescribed for such worship — a tiling which we conceive must be inevital)le if such liturgical form had lieen the best form, the most ac- cordant with the will of the Great Head over all things to the Church, and the most consonant with the mind of the Spirit, tlie most appropriate for the bestowment and exercise of his influences. In things of much less importance we have explicit directions ; and it is hard- ly to be supposed, if a liturgy for public worship were most appropriate for the wants of men, and most agreeable to the will of God, that there should have bean no directions, nor even intimations in regard to it. It is hardly to be supposed, when all things were set in order in the churches, that this main thing should have been neglected, or left at loose ends — so loose that not a single trace even of so much as a pre- scribed articular confession of faith or form of praj'er can be found in the New Testament oracles" (Chee- ver). In the same S[)irit, Coleman {Apostolical and Primilice Church, ch. xi) undertakes to prove, 1, that the use of forms of praj'er is opposed to the spirit of the Christian dispensation ; 2, that it is opposed to the example of Clirist and of his apostles; and, 3, that it is unauthorized by their instructions. (2.) On the
other hand, in favor of forms, it is declared that "the slightest acquaintance with Scripture is enouxh to convince cavillers that contrary to Scripture could not be that practice for which we can plead the precedent of Moses and Miriam, and the daughters of Israel, of Aaron and his sons when they blessed the people, of Deborah and Barak ; when the practice was even more directly sanctioned by the Holy Ghost at the time he inspired David and the Psalmists ; for what are the Psalms but an inspired form of prayer for the use of the Church under the Gospel, as well as under the law ? The services of the synagogue, too, it is well known, were conducted according to a prescript form. To those services our blessed Lord did himself conform ; and severely as he reproved the Jews for their departure, in various particulars, from the prin- ciples of their fathers, against their practice in this particular never did he utter one word of censure ; nay, he conjirrned the practice wli-^n he himself gave to his disciples a form of praj'er, and framed that prayer, too, on the model, and in some degree in the very words, of prayers then in use. Our Lord, more- over, when giving his directions to the rulers of his Church, at the same time that he conferred on them authoritj' to bind and to loose, directed them to agree touching what they should ask for, which seems al- most to convey an injunction to the rulers of every particular Church to provide their people with a form of prayer" (Hook). But "far more weight than all other arguments together has the one obvious and sim- ple reason that our Lord's especial blessing and favor- able reception of petitions is bestowed on those who, assembling in his name, shall 'agree' touching what they shall ask in his name. Now this surely implies the exclusive use of precomposed praj'ers in a congre- gation, since it plainly seems an impossibility for un- inspired men to agree togetlicr in a prai-er offered up by one of them if they do not know at least the sub- stance of the prayer before they hear him utter the words. In their private devotions, let individuals ad- dress their ' Father who secth in secret' in a.ny exjjres- sions (that are but intelligible to themselves) which occur at the moment. But congregational praj^er, common supplication, joint worship, is a very different thing. And accordingly our Lord supplies to his dis- ciples no form of words for solitarv devotion, but does teach them a fo.m evidently designed for joint wor- ship. The contrast is most remarkable : ' Thou, when thmi prayest, enter into thy closet,' etc.; 'when ye pray, say, Our Father,' etc. Our Lord, bj^ teaching this form (and which he delivered on two distinct oc- casions in nearly the same words — IMatt. vi, 9, and Luke xi, 1, 2), gave the strongest possible sanction to the use of precomposed prayers for congregational worship" (Eden).
II. From Antiquity and Usage. — Extreme views are maintained as to tJie usage of the primitive Church in prayer. (1.) On the one hand, lord King says (Consti- tution of the Primitive Church), " There is not the least mention of fixed forms in an}' of the primitive writings, nor the least M'ord or syllable tending thereto, that I can find, which is a most unaccountable silence if ever such there were, but rather some expressions intimat- ing the contrary." One of the principal authorities which he adduces is Justin Martyr, who, describing the manner of the prayer before the celebration of the Lord's Supper, says that the bishop sent up prayers and praises to God u-ith his utmo.^t ability (ot)/ ^vva/tic). This he expounds, that he prayed witii the best of his abilities, invention, expression, and judgment, exert- ing his own gifts and parts in suitable manner and apt expression. He also quotes Tertullian and Origen in vindication of his views, tliat written forms of prayer were never used in the Church. To the same effect Coleman (Aposi. Church, cli. xi) maintains that forms are " opposed to the simplicity and freedom of primi- tive worship," and that their use, in fact, "was un-