on any day of the week, when the voice of Divine Providence, or their obligations to God, required them to do it. If then this law of God was not a prohibition of religious exercises on a day which was not the weekly Sabbath, we are not forbidden to meet together for public worship, on any day of the week, when it may be convenient for the purpose. Let us next inquire what authority we have for meeting together for prayer or religious exercises, on any day of the week, when there is occasion for it? Here we find example for our authority. The disciples of our Lord and their christian brethren for some time after his ascension, met together every day for prayer and other religious exercises. "And they continued daily with one accord in the temple and breaking bread from house to house, praising God." Acts ii. 46. If it be granted, that this was an extraordinary sea. Son, which will not return again; yet as the apostles were under divine guidance, their example is sufficient authority for us, to meet on any day of the week for prayer and instruction, when there is a call in Divine Providence for so doing. In their example, we have abundant evidence that the inspired apostles did not consider it a violation of any divine command to worship God, or perform religious service, on any day of the week. And though their example, will not authorize us, in every case, to do as they did, yet it does authorize us to meet for prayer on any day of the week, when our meeting does not interfere with any other duty. We may therefore believe, that God is pleased with the sincere worship of true Christians, as well on any other day, as on the weekly Sabbath. The apostle Paul charged Tim. othy to be instant in season, out of season, in ministring the gospel of God. To be instant in season can mean no less, than to be employed in the ministry on the Sabbath. To be instant out of season can mean no less, than preaching the word and performing other religious exercises on other days besides the Sabbath. And if it was the duty of Timothy to be diligently employed in ministering the gospel of God, on secular days, it follows, that such religious exercises, at these seasons, are not prohibited in the word of God, but encouraged; and if encouraged Christians are justified in attending them. For it cannot be a minister's duty to preach, unless people may have liberty to hear. Agreeable to this charge to Timothy was the practice of the apostles. Peter and the other apostles, it is said, "And daily in the temple and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ." Did it violate no law of God for an apostle to preach Christ? It violates then no law of God, for people to assemble and hear Christ preached. The apostle told the elders of the Ephesian church, that by the space of three years, he ceased not to warn every one, night and day with tears. If the apostle had a warrant to administer warning to his brethren, on any day of the week, they had liberty to hear it, whether in an individ ual or in a congregated capacity. Of After what has been said, shall the example of our Lord Did he refrain be adduced? from teaching, instructing, and ministering to men throughout the week, excepting on the Sab. bath? Was he not, on the contrary, every day, as he had oppor. tunity, employed in doing good to the bodies and souls of men. Often large assemblies waited upon him. Multitudes resorted to him, not on the Sabbath only, but on other days of the week, to hear the word of God; and he forbid them not. His example affords us sufficient warrant to meet together for religious purposes not on the Sabbath only, but also on any other day. If then we transgress no command of God, if we have the example of Christ and his apostles to support us, in religious meetings on secular days, then who may forbid us the privilege? Shall all bodies of men, all corporate, or voluntary associations convene on days appropriated to labor, to transact the concerns of their respective societies; and shall not Christians be permitted the privilege to which they are entitled in common with other men? They have, unquestionably, a civil right to meet together in a peaceable manner for prayer, on any day. When God assures them, that they have liberty to come to him in prayer, as often as they please ; when Christ assures them, that when two or three of them are agreed to ask any thing in prayer, they have liberty to meet for the purpose, at any time, and they shall have audience; when the gates of gospel grace are open, night and day, for individuals, or for collective bodies of Christians, shall any one drive them back, and tell them, that meetings for such purposes are a nui. sance to society? We ought to obey God rather than men. It is a serious inquiry, and deserves the serious and candid attention of all who oppose meetings for prayer and other relig. ious exercises, under pretence of their not being allowable on the Sabbath, whether they are not resisting the Holy Ghost? We may err through ignorance; but it ought to be seriously consider. ed, whether opposition to prayer and religious conference, un. der pretence that such meetings are a transgression of a divine command, is not opposition to the cause of God and actual resistance to the Spirit of grace. Why do we never hear the same argument urged against the practice of wasting hours in public houses, in idleness, in profaneness, in filthy communication? Why must the argument never be used but for the purpose of hindering Christians from the duty of prayer? Is it not because the objector feels more opposition to devotion, than to idleness? But is prayer, then really injurious to society than idleness, or meetings for vain amusement? more Ah! my brethren, it is easy to complain of any duty, when the heart is opposed to it. Judas found fault with the expences of a little ointment bestowed in honor to Christ. He considered it a needless waste. He pretended that the avails of the ointment might have been put to a better use. But why this complaint? Was it not because he wished to have all he could obtain for his own use, and grudg ed whatever was bestowed on Christ. It is painful to sinners to see Christ honored. Stephen charged the unbeliev ing Jews with the sin of resisting the Holy Ghost. It deserves consideration, whether they did not commit this sin, in opposing the means of divine instruction,? They persecuted the prophets, they slew them who had before proclaimed the coming of Christ. Was it not painful to them to hear Christ exalted, while noth. ing good was said of themselves? It must be further considered that in the christian Scriptures, those are commended, who often are employed in religious exercises, whether on the Sabbath or on other days. "Then they that feared the Lord, spake often one to another! and the Lord heark ened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him, for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon his name." The apostle gave it in charge to his brethren, to be daily in the duty of exhorting one another. "But exhort one another daily, while it is called to-day." Many more instances may be found, both in the Old and New Testament, which will authorize Christians to meet, at any time, for prayer and chris. tian edification. It remains to say that no instances can be found in the Holy Scriptures, which reprove, censure, or condemn Christians for meeting on any day for the worship of God. The professed people of God have been often reproved for their performing religious duties in a sinful manner, and for having sinister views, in attending upon religious services but we find no reproof VOL. II. New Series. given them for voluntarily setting apart, and sincerely observ. ing days for fasting and prayer. Had there been a law of God, absolutely forbidding the public worship of God on any day but the Sabbath, we should have found some reproof given for the transgression of it: for it is evident, that if there were such a law, it has been constantly violated by the professed people of God. But no where in the word of God can any such reproof be found. I now beg leave to address myself to the opposers of prayer meetings and religious conferences. Too much has been said against these meetings, both by those who call themselves Christians, and by others. My friends, you allege, in opposition to such meetings, an express law of God. You endeavor to hinder us from attending them by insisting, that the command of God requires us to labor six days, and does not permit us to worship God, in a social manner, when we ought to be employed in our secular callings. Do you not know, that an argument which proves too much, proves nothing? Your argument is, that six days we must work and not worship. Before you bring this against us, you will please to remember, that the same argument goes to censure all waste of time, in visiting from place to place, all unnecessary attendance on military exercises, all spending of time in places where mere pleasure is the object sought. you so rigidly adhere to your construction of the divine command, in one case, why not ad. here to it in all cases. You complain that meetings for prayer 2 C If are wrong for being on a day on which we are required to work; and are not you, for the same reason doing wrong in spending season after season in idleness or amusement? The truth is, you do not believe your own construction of the divine command. Your argument is only a pretence to cover your aversion to devotional exercises. If you were honest, and spoke the real sentiments of your hearts, would you not drop your argument, and frankly own your hatred to prayer? Christian brethren, you will al. ways appear in character in op. posing whatever is wrong in itself; whatever is erroneous, and has a tendency to mislead; whatever is essentially injurious to the interest of Christ. But you will beware of being found acting as the enemies of Christ are ready to act. It is time that we arise from the dust, and shake off our sloth and our slumber. Whatever may have been the usages of past times, we have arrived at a period, when more exertions are making to spread the knowledge of God, than have ever before been made. Nor should we be unwilling to expose ourselves to reproof, if it be for well doing. Prayer is the life of the true Christian. If we are backward in prayer, if we have no delight in devotion, how can we consid. er ourselves prepared to have a part in the enjoyments and em. ployments of heaven? Brethren, we have it to con. sider that merely our speaking against a good thing or a bad thing is not religion, we can have no religion unless we have the Spirit of Christ. The indwelling of God's Spirit is essentially connected with our sal. vation. If we pray as true Christians, we pray for the Spirit of God; and if we have the Spirit of God, we shall not only do those things which please him, but we shall be more or less useful in the world. Time will soon be gone, and the seasons of prayer return no more. Let others then hate prayer, and speak reproachfully of meetings for this purpose. Let them be forward to enjoy days of pleasure, and equally forward to censure and condemn such as devote an hour to relig. ion. But let it be our delight, as it is our privilege and our du ty, to pray without ceasing. If we are Christians, let us be active. Let us press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. JUSTUS. SELECTIONS. ON RESTITUTION. From Dr. TAYLOR'S Rules and Exercises of HOLY LIVING. (Continued from p. 176.) Rules for making Restitution. 1. WHOSOEVER is an effective real cause of doing his neighbor wrong, by what instrument soev er he does it, whether by commanding or encouraging it, by counselling or commanding it, by acting it, or not hindering it when he might and ought, by concealing it or receiving it, is bound to make restitution to his neighbor; if without, the injury had not been done, but by him or his assistance it was. For by the same reason that every one of these is guilty of the sin, and is cause of the injury, by the same they are bound to make reparation; because by him his neighbor is made worse, and therefore is it put into that state from whence he was forced. And suppose that thou hast persuaded an injury to be done to thy neighbor, which others would have persuaded if thou hast not, yet thou art still obliged, because thou didst cause the injury, just as they had been obliged if they had done it: and thou art not at all the less bound by having persons as ill inclined as thou wert. 2. He that commanded the injury to be done, is first bound; then he that did it; and after these, they also are obliged who did so assist, as without them the thing would not have been done. If satisfaction be made by any of the former, the latter is tied to repentance, but no restitution, But if the injured person be not righted, every one of them is wholly guilty of the injustice, and therefore bound to restitution singly and entirely. 3. Whosoever intends a lit. tle injury to his neighbor, and acts it, and by it a greater evil accidentally comes, he is obliged to make an entire reparation of all the injury, of that which he intended, and of that which he intended not, but yet acted by his own instrument going farther than he at first proposed it. He that sets fire on a Plane-tree to 4. He that hinders a charitable was |