3. The last part of the antecedent was, that they have no prohibition to use these advantages and opportunities to God's solemn worship. I add this, lest any should say, though they have such advantages, yet God may restrain them for the avoiding some greater inconveniencies another way; as he hath restrained women from speaking in the assemblies. But, (1.) God hath neither restrained them in the law of nature, nor in the written law; therefore not at all. He that can show it in either, let him do it. (2.) I never yet read or heard any knowing christian once affirm that God hath forbidden families solemnly to worship him, and therefore I think it needless to prove a negative, when no man is known to hold the affirmative. Indeed for some kinds of worship, as preaching and expounding Scripture, some have prohibited them; but not reading, catechizing, all instructing, praying, praises, singing psalms, much less all solemn worship wholly. So much for the antecedent.
I now come to prove the consequence. The foresaid advantages and opportunities are talents given by God, which they that receive, are obliged faithfully to improve for God; therefore families having such advantages and opportunities for God's solemn worship, are bound to improve them faithfully for God, in the solemn worshipping of him. For the antecedent, 1. It is unquestionable that these are talents, that is, improvable mercies given by God. For as none dare deny them to be mercies, so none dare (I hope) say that God is not the giver of them. And then, 2. That such talents must be improved faithfully for God, from whom they are received, is plain, from Matt. xxv. throughout, especially ver. 14-31. And Luke xx. 10, he requireth the fruits of his vineyard; and Matt. x. 42, if he intrust us with a cup of cold water, he expecteth it for a prophet when he calleth for it. And if he intrust us with outward riches, he expecteth that "we give to him that asketh," Matt. v. 42; Luke vi. 30, 38; xi. 41; xii. 33. His stewards must give an account of their stewardships, Luke xvi. 2. Christ telleth us of all our talents in general, Luke xii. 48, that "Unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required; and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." And of our words in particular Christ tells us, Matt. xii. 36, that "of every idle word men shall give an account at the day of judgment." Much more for denying to use both our tongues and hearts in God's worship, when he gives us such opportunities. "It is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful," 1 Cor. iv. 2. "As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God," &c. 1 Pet. iv. 10, 11. Many more of the like scriptures prove the antecedent of the enthymeme, and the consequent needs no proof.
Arg.II. The solemn worship of God in and by families as such, is required by the very law of nature, therefore it is of divine institution. The consequence can be denied by no man that renounceth not reason and nature itself; denying the law of nature to be God's law, which is indeed partly presupposed in the law supernatural, and partly rehearsed in it, but never subverted by it. Positives are more mutable than naturals are.
The antecedent is thus manifested. 1. Natural reason (or the law of nature) requireth that all men do faithfully improve all the talents that God hath intrusted them with, to his honour; therefore natural reason (or the law of nature) doth require, that God be solemnly worshipped in families, he having given them such advantages as aforesaid thereunto. 2. The law of nature requireth, that all societies that have God for their founder or institutor, should, to their utmost capacities, be devoted to him that founded and instituted them: but that God is the founder and institutor of families, is known by the light of nature itself; therefore the law of nature requireth, that families be to the utmost of their capacities devoted to God; and consequently, that they solemnly worship him, they being capable of so doing. I need not prove the major, because I speak only to men that are possessed of the law of nature mentioned in it; and therefore they know it themselves to be true. Yet let me so far stay on the illustration, as to tell you the grounds of it. And, 1. God is the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the principal efficient and ultimate end of all; and therefore of families. And therefore they should be for him, as well as they are from him: for "of him, and through him, and to him are all things." This argument I draw from nature, which can have no beginning but God, nor any end but God. The 2. I draw from the divine intention, in the fabrication and ordination of all things. God made all things for himself, and can have no ultimate end below himself. The 3. I draw from hisjus dominii, his right of propriety which he hath over all things, and so over families as such; they are all absolutely his own alone. And that which is solely or absolutely a man's own, should be for his use, and employed to his honour and ends: much more that which is God's, seeing man is not capable of such a plenary propriety of any thing in the world, as God hath in all things. 4. I arguea jure imperii, from God's right of government. If he have a full right of government of families, as families, then families as families must honour and worship him according to their utmost capacities. But he hath a full right of absolute government over families as families; therefore—The consequence of the major is grounded on these two things: 1. That God himself is the end of his own government: this is proper to his regimen. All human government is said by politicians to be terminated ultimately in the public good of the society. But God's pleasure and glory is the end of his government, and is, as it were, the public or universal good. 2. In that nature teacheth us, that supreme honour is due to all that are supreme governors; therefore they are to have the most honourable titles, of majesty, highness, excellency, &c. and actions answerable to those titles: Mal. i. 6, "If I be a father, where is mine honour? if I be a master, where is my fear?" Fear is oft put for all God'sworship. If then there be no family whereof God is not the Father or Founder, and the Master, or Owner and Governor, then there is none but should honour and fear him, or worship him, and that not only as single men, but as families; because he is not only the Father and Master, the Lord and Ruler of them as men, but also as families. Honour is as due to the rector, as protection to the subjects, and in our case much more. God is not a mere titular but real Governor. All powers on earth are derived from him, and are indeed his power. All lawful governors are his officers, and hold their places under him, and act by him. As God therefore is the proper Sovereign of every commonwealth, and the Head of the church, so is he the Head of every family. Therefore as every commonwealth should perform such worship or honour to their earthly sovereign, as is due to man; so each society should, according to their capacities, perform divine worship and honour to God. And if any object, That by this rule commonwealths, as such, must meet together to worship God, which is impossible; I answer, They must worship him according to their natural capacities; and so must families according to theirs. The same general precept obligeth to a diverse manner of duty according to the divers capacities of the subject. Commonwealths must, in their representatives at least, engage themselves to God as commonwealths, and worship him in the most convenient way that they are capable of. Families may meet together for prayer, though a nation cannot. As an association of churches, called a provincial or national church, is obliged to worship God, as well as particular congregations, yet not in one place; because it is impossible: nature limiteth and maketh the difference.
And that the obligation of families to honour and worship God, may yet appear more evidently, consider that God's right of propriety and rule is twofold, yet each title plenary alone. 1. He is our Owner and Ruler upon his title of creation. 2. So he is by his right of redemption. By both these he is not only Lord and Ruler of persons, but families; all societies being his; and the regimen of persons being chiefly exercised over them in societies. "All power in heaven and earth is given unto Christ," Matt. xviii. 18; "and all judgment committed unto him," John v. 22; "and all things delivered into his hands," John xiii. 3; "and therefore to him shall every knee bow, both of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;" (either with a bowing of worship, or of forced acknowledgment;) and "every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father," Phil. ii. 10. Bowing to and confessing Christ voluntarily to God's glory, is true worship; all must do this according to their several capacities; and therefore families according to theirs.
A third consideration, which I thought to have added but for illustration, may well stand as an argument itself; and it is this:
Arg.III. If besides all the forementioned opportunities and obligations, families do live in the presence of God, and ought by faith to apprehend that presence, then is it God's will that families as such should solemnly worship him. But the former is true, therefore the latter.
The consequence of the major, which alone requires proof, I prove by an argumenta fortiori, from the honour due to all earthly governors. Though when a king, a father, a master are absent, such actual honour, to be presented to them, is not due, because they are not capable of receiving it (further thanmediante aliqua persona, vel re, which beareth some representation of the superior, or relation to him); yet when they stand by, it is a contemptuous subject, a disobedient child, that will not perform actual honour or human worship to them. Now God is ever present, not only with each person as such, but also with every family as such. As he is said to walk among the golden candlesticks in his churches, so doth he in the families of all by his common presence, and of his servants by his gracious presence. This they easily find by his directing them, and blessing the affairs of their families. If any say, We see not God, else we would daily worship him in our families.Answ.Faith seeth him who to sense is invisible. If one of you had a son that were blind and could not see his own father, would you think him therefore excusable, if he would not honour his father, when he knew him to be present? We know God to be present, though flesh be blind and cannot see him.
Arg.IV. If christian families (besides all the forementioned advantages and obligations) are also societies sanctified to God, then is it God's will that families, as such, should solemnly worship him; but christian families are societies sanctified to God; therefore, &c.
The reason of the consequence is, because things sanctified must in the most eminent sort, that they are capable, be used for God. To sanctify a person or thing, is to set it apart, and separate it from a common or unclean use, and to devote it to God, to be employed in his service. To alienate this from God, or not to use it for God, when it is dedicated to him, or sanctified by his own election and separation of it from common use, is sacrilege. God hath a double right (of creation and redemption) to all persons. But a treble right to the sanctified. Ananias his fearful judgment was a sad example of God's wrath, on those that withhold from him what was devoted to him. If christian families as such be sanctified to God, they must as such worship him in their best capacity.
That christian families are sanctified to God I prove thus: 1. A society of holy persons must needs be a holy society. But a family of christians is a society of holy persons; therefore, 2. We find in Scripture not only single persons, but the societies of such, sanctified to God. Deut. vii. 6, "Thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God; he hath chosen thee to be a special people to himself above all people that are upon the face of the earth." So Deut. xiv. 20, 21. So the body of that commonwealth did all jointly enter into covenant with God, and God to them, Deut. xxix.; xxx.; and xxvi. 17-19, "Thou hast vouched the Lord this day to be thy God, and to walk in his ways; and the Lord hath vouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, that thou mayst be an holy people to the Lord." So chap. xxviii. 9; Dan. viii. 24; xii. 7. Joshua, chap. xxiv. devoteth himself and his house to the Lord; "I and my house will serve the Lord." And Abraham by circumcision (the covenant, or seal of the covenant of God) consecrated his whole household to God; and so were all families after him to do (as to the males, in whom the whole was consecrated). And whether besides the typifying intent, there were not somewhat more in the sanctifying of all the first-born to God, who if they lived, were to be the heads of the families, may be questioned.
The passover was a family duty, by which they were yet further sanctified to God. Yea, it is especially to be observed how in the New Testament, the Holy Ghost doth imitate the language of the Old, and speak of God's people as of holy societies, as the Jews were. As in many prophecies it was foretold that nations and kingdoms should serve him (ofwhich I have spoken more in my book of Baptism); and among those who should "mourn over him whom they have pierced" in gospel times, when the spirit of grace and supplication is poured forth, are "the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; every family, even all the families that remained, apart, and their wives apart," Zech. xi. 12-14. So Christ sendeth his disciples to "baptize nations," having discipled them; and "the kingdoms of the world shall become the kingdoms of the Lord, and his Christ." And as, Exod. xix. 5, 6, God saith of the Jews, "Ye shall be a peculiar treasure to me above all people; and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation;" so doth Peter say of all christians, 1 Pet. ii. 5-7, 9, "Ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people, that you should show forth the praises of him that hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light." Mark how fully this text doth prove all that we are about. It speaks of christians collectively, as in societies, and in societies of all the most eminent sorts: "a generation;" which seems especially to refer to tribes and families: "a priesthood, nation, people;" which comprehendeth all the orders in the nation ofttimes. And in all these respects they are holy, and peculiar, and chosen, to show, that God's people are sanctified in these relations and societies. And then mark the end of this sanctification; ver. 5, "to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ;" ver. 9, "to show forth the praises of him that hath called you," &c.
Yea, it seems that there was a special dedication of families to God. And therefore we read so frequently of households converted and baptized: though none at age were baptized, but such as seemed believers; yet when they professed faith, they were all together initiated as a household. And it seems, the master's interest and duty were taken to be so great for the conversion of the rest, that as he was not content himself with his own conversion, but to labour presently, even before his baptism, that his household should join with him, that so the whole family at once might be devoted to God; so God did bless this his own order and ordinance to that end: and where he imposed duty on masters, he usually gave success, so that commonly the whole family was converted and baptized with the ruler of the family. So Acts xviii. 8, "Crispus believed on the Lord with all his house, and they were baptized;" and Acts xvi. 32, Paul promiseth the jailer, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved and thy house; and he and all his were baptized straightway; for he believed in God with all his house," ver. 33, 34. And Lydia is described a "worshipper of God," Acts xvi. 14; and ver. 15, "she was baptized and her household." And the angel told Cornelius, that Peter should tell him "words whereby he and all his household should be saved," who were baptized accordingly, Acts xi. 14. And 1 Cor. i. 16, Paul baptized the household of Stephanas. And Christ told Zaccheus, salvation was come that day unto his house, "and he and all his household believed." So that nobleman, John iv. 53. Therefore when Christ sent forth his disciples, he saith, "If the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you." So that as it is apparently the duty of every christian sovereign, to do what he is able to make all his people God's people; and so to dedicate them to God as a holy nation, in a national covenant, as the Israelites were: so is it the unquestionable duty of every christian ruler of a family, to improve his interest, power, and parts to the uttermost, to bring all his family to be people of Christ in the baptismal covenant, and so to dedicate all his family to Christ. Yet further I prove this, in that believers themselves being all sanctified to God, it must needs follow, that all their lawful relations, and especially all commanded states of relation, are also sanctified to God; for when themselves are dedicated to God, it is absolutely without reserve, to serve him with all that they have, and in every relation and capacity that he shall set them. It were a madness to think, that a christian totally devoted unto God when he is a private man, if he were after made a soldier, a minister, a magistrate, a king, were not bound by his dedication now to serve God as a soldier, a minister, a magistrate, a king. So he that is devoted to God in a single state, is bound to serve him as a husband, a father, a master, when he comes into that state: we do devote all that we have to God, when we devote ourselves to him.
Moreover the Scripture tells us, that to "the pure all things are pure," Tit. i. 15, 16. And "all things are sanctified to them by the word and prayer," 1 Tim. iv. 5; which is in that they are made the goods and enjoyments, actions and relations of a sanctified people, who are themselves devoted or sanctified to God: so that all sanctification referreth ultimately and principally to God;Quod sanctum Deo sanctum est; though it may be said subordinately to be sanctified to us. Seeing then it is past all doubt that every christian is a man sanctified and devoted to God, and that whenever any man is so devoted to God, he is devoted to serve him to the utmost capacity in every state, relation, or condition that he is in, and with all the faculties he possesseth, it followeth that those relations are sanctified to God, and in them he ought to worship him and honour him.
Yet further we find in Scripture, that the particular family relations are expressly sanctified. The family complete consisteth of three pairs of relations; husband and wife, parents and children, masters and servants. Husbands must love their wives with a holy love in the Lord, even as "the Lord loved the church, who gave himself for it, to sanctify and cleanse it by the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church," Eph. v. 25-27. "Wives must submit themselves to their husbands as unto the Lord; and be subject to them, as the church is to Christ," Eph. v. 22-24. "Children must obey their parents in the Lord," Eph. vi. 1. "Parents must bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord," Eph. vi. 4. "Servants must be obedient unto their masters as unto Christ, and as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from their hearts with good will, doing service as to the Lord, and not to man; knowing that what good thing any man doth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free: and masters must do the same to them, knowing that their Master is in heaven," Eph. vi. 5-9. So that it is evident that every distinct family relation is dedicated or holy to God and to be used to the utmost for God. I shall have occasion to make further use anon of these texts for the particular sorts of worship, though I now make use of them as for worship in general.
Arg.V. The several sorts of solemn worship in and by christian families, are found, appointed, used, and commanded in the Scripture, therefore it may well be concluded of worship in the general; seeing the genus is in each species. But this argument brings me to the second part of my undertaking; viz. to prove the point as to some special kinds ofworship; which I the more hasten to, because in so doing I prove the general also.
II. Concerning God's worship in special, I shall speak but to two or three of the chief parts of it, which belong to families.
And, 1. of teaching, under which I comprise,
1. Teaching the letter of the Scripture, (1.) By reading it. (2.) By teaching others to read it. (3.) Causing them to learn it by memory, which is a kind of catechising.
2. Teaching the sense of it.
3. Applying what is so taught by familiar reproofs, admonitions, and exhortations.
Prop.II. It is the will of God that the rulers of families should teach those that are under them the doctrine of salvation, i.e. the doctrine of God concerning salvation, and the terms on which it is to be had, and the means to be used for attaining it, and all the duties requisite on our parts in order thereunto.
Before I come to the proof, take these cautions: 1. Where I say men must thus teach, I imply they must be able to teach, and not teach before they are able; and if they be not able it is their own sin, God having vouchsafed them means for enablement. 2. Men must measure their teaching according to their abilities, and not pretend to more than they have, nor attempt that which they cannot perform, thereby incurring the guilt of proud self-conceitedness, profanation, or other abuse of holy things. For example, men that are not able judiciously to do it, must not presume to interpret the original, or to give the sense of dark prophecies, and other obscure texts of Scripture, nor to determine controversies beyond their reach. 3. Yet may such conveniently study what more learned, able men say to such cases; and tell their families, this is the judgment of fathers, or councils, or such and such learned divines. 4. But ordinarily it is the safest, humblest, wisest, and most orderly way for the master of the family to let controversies and obscure Scriptures alone, and to teach the plain, few necessary doctrines commonly contained in catechisms, and to direct in matters of necessary practice. 5. Family teaching must stand in a subordination to ministerial teaching, as families are subordinate to churches; and therefore, (1.) Family teaching must give place to ministerial teaching, and never be set against it; you must not be hearing the master of a family, when you should be in a church hearing the pastor; and if the pastor send for servants or children to be catechised in any fit place or at any fit time, the master is not then to be doing it himself, or to hinder them, but they must go first to the pastor to be taught; also if a pastor come into a family, the master is to give place, and the family to hear him first. (2.) And therefore when any hard text or controversies fall in, the master should consult with the pastor for their exposition, unless it fall out that the master of the family be better learned in the Scripture than the pastor is, which is rare, and rarer should be, seeing unworthy ministers should be removed, and private men that are worthy should be made ministers. And the pastors should be the ablest men in the congregation. Now to the proof (remembering still that whatsoever proves it the ruler's duty to teach, must needs prove it the family's duty to learn, and to hearken to his teaching that they may learn).
Arg.I. From Deut. xi. 18-21, "Therefore shall you lay up these my words in your hearts, and in your soul, and bind them for a sign upon your hand, that they may be as frontlets between your eyes; and you shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up; and thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house, and upon your gates; that your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children." The like words are in Deut. vi. 6-8, where it is said, "And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children." So Deut. iv. 9, "Teach them thy sons, and thy sons' sons."
Here there is one part of family duty, viz. teaching children the laws of God, as plainly commanded as words can express it.
Arg.II. From these texts which commend this. Gen. xviii. 18, 19, "All the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him, for I know him that he will command his children and his household after him; and they shall keep the way of the Lord;" and it was not only a command at his death what they should do when he was dead; for, 1. It cannot be imagined that so holy a man should neglect a duty all his lifetime, and perform it but at death, and be commended for that. 2. He might then have great cause to question the efficacy. 3. As God commandeth a diligent inculcating precepts on children, so no doubt it is a practice answerable to such precepts that is here commended; and it is not bare teaching, but commanding, that is here mentioned, to show that it must be an improvement of authority, as well as of knowledge and elocution.
So 2 Tim. iii. 15. From a child Timothy knew the Scripture by the teaching of his parents, as appeareth, 2 Tim. i. 5.
Arg.III. Eph. vi. 4, "Bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord;"παιδεία, translated nurture, signifieth both instruction and correction, showing that parents must use both doctrine and authority, or force, with their children for the matters of the Lord; andνουθεσία, translated admonition, signifieth such instruction as putteth doctrine into the mind, and chargeth it on them, and fully storeth their minds therewith; and it also signifieth chiding, and sometimes correction. And it is to be noted, that children must be brought up in this; the wordἐκτρέφετε, signifying carefully to nourish, importeth that as you feed them with milk and bodily food, so you must as carefully and constantly feed and nourish them with the nurture and admonition of the Lord. It is called the nurture and admonition of the Lord, because the Lord commandeth it, and because it is the doctrine concerning the Lord, and the doctrine of his teaching, and the doctrine that leadeth to him.
Arg.IV. Prov. xxii. 6, "Train up a child in the way where he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it."
Arg.V. From all those places that charge children to hearken to the instructions of their parents, Prov. i. 8, "My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother." Prov. vi. 20 is the like; and iii. 22, with many the like. Yea, the son that is stubborn and rebellious against the instruction and correction of a father or mother in gluttony, drunkenness, &c. was to be brought forth to the magistrate, and stoned to death, Deut. xxi. 18-20. Now all the scriptures that require children to hear their parents, do imply that the parents must teach their children; for there is no hearing and learning without teaching.
But lest you say that parents and children are not the whole family, (though they may be, and in Abraham's ease before mentioned, the whole household is mentioned,) the next shall speak to other relations.
Arg.VI. 1 Pet. iii. 7, "Likewise, ye husbands,dwell with them (your wives) according to knowledge;" and Eph. v. 25, 26, "Love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it." And this plainly implies that this knowledge must be used for the instruction and sanctification of the wife. 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35, women must "keep silence in the church, for it is not permitted unto them to speak, but they are to be under obedience, as also saith the law. If they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home." Which shows that at home their husbands must teach them.
Arg.VII. Col. iii. 22-25; Eph. vi. 5-8, "Servants must be obedient unto their masters as unto Christ, and serve them as serving the Lord Christ," and therefore ministers must command in Christ.
Arg.VIII.A fortiori, fellow-christians must "exhort one another daily while it is called to-day, lest any be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin;" much more must the rulers of families do so to wives, children, and servants. 1 Pet. iv. 11, "If any speak, it must be as the oracles of God;" much more to our own families. Col. iii. 16, "Let the word of God dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another;" and much more must a man do this to wife, children, and servants, than to those more remote.
Arg.IX. Those that are to be chosen deacons or bishops, must be such as rule their own children and their own household well, 1 Tim. iii. 4, 12. Now mark, 1. That this is one of those christian virtues which they were to have before they were made officers, therefore other christians must have and perform it as well as they. 2. It is a religious, holy governing, such as a minister is to exercise over his flock, that is here mentioned, which is in the things of God and salvation, or else the comparison or argument would not suit; ver. 5, "For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he rule the church of God?" But of this more before. I would say more on this point, but I think it so clear in Scripture as to make it needless: I pass therefore to the next.
Prop.III. Family discipline is part of God's solemn worship or service appointed in his word. This is not called worship in so near a sense as some of the rest, but more remotely; yet so it may well be called, in that, 1. It is an authoritative act done by commission from God; 2. Upon such as disobey him, and as such; 3. And to his glory; yea, and it should be done with as great solemnity and reverence, as other parts of worship.
The acts of this discipline are, 1. Denying the ungodly entrance into the family. 2. Correcting; 3. Or casting out those that are in. I shall be but brief on these.
1. The first you have 2 John 10, "If there come any to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed; for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."
2. The duty of correcting, either by corporal, sensible punishment, or by withdrawing some benefit, is so commonly required in Scripture, especially towards children, that I will not stand on it, lest I speak in vain what you all know already; and how Eli suffered for neglecting it, you know.
3. The discipline of casting the wicked out of the family (servants I mean, who are separable members) you may find Psal. ci. 2, 3, 7, 8, "I will walk within my house with a perfect heart, I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes. He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house; he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight."
Prop.IV. Solemn prayer and praises of God in and by christian families is of divine appointment.
1. For proof of this, I must desire you to look back to all the arguments which proved the dueness of worship in general, for they will yet more especially prove this sort of worship, seeing prayer and praise are most immediately and eminently called God's worship of any; (under praises I comprehend psalms of praise, and under prayer, psalms of prayer;) yet let us add some more.
Arg.I. It is God's will that christians who have fit occasions and opportunities for prayer and praises should improve them, but christian families have fit occasions and opportunities for prayer and praise, therefore it is God's will they should improve them.
The major is evident in many Scripture precepts. 1 Tim. ii. 8, "I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting." 1 Thess. v. 17, 18, "Pray without ceasing; in every thing give thanks; for this is the will of God concerning you." Col. iv. 2, "Continue in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving." Col. iii. 16, 17, "Teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts unto the Lord: and whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus; giving thanks unto God and the Father by him." Rom. xii. 12, "Continuing instant in prayer." "Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; and for me that utterance may be given me," Eph. vi. 18. Many the like texts might be named, every one of which afford an argument for family praises most effectual.
1. If men must pray every where, (that is convenient,) then sure in their families. But, &c. Erg. 2. If men must pray without ceasing, then sure in their families. 3. If men must in every thing give thanks, then sure in family mercies, and then, according to the nature of them, together. 4. If men must continue in prayer and watch in it, (for fit advantages and against impediments,) and in thanksgiving, then doubtless they must not omit the singular advantages which are administered in families. 5. If we must continue instant in prayer and supplication, &c. then doubtless in family prayer, in our families, unless that be no place and no prayer.Object.But this binds us no more to prayer in our families than any where else.Answ.Yes, it binds us to take all fit opportunities; and we have more fit opportunities in our own families than in other men's, or than in occasional meetings, or than in any ordinary societies, except the church.
And here let me tell you, that it is ignorance to call for particular express Scripture, to require praying in families, as if we thought the general commands did not comprehend this particular, and were not sufficient. God doth in much wisdom leave out of his written law the express determination of some of those circumstantials, or the application of general precepts to some of those subjects, to which common reason and the light of nature sufficeth to determine and apply them. The Scripture giveth us the general, "Pray alway with all manner of prayer in all places," that is, omit no fit advantages and opportunities for prayer. What if God had said no more than this about prayer in Scripture? It seems some men would have said, God hath not required us to pray at all, (when he requireth us to pray always,) because he tells us not when and where, and how oft, and with whom, and in what words, &c. And so they would have concluded God no where bids us pray in secret, nor pray in families, nor pray in assemblies,nor pray with the godly, nor with the wicked, nor pray every day, nor once a week; nor with a book, nor without a book, and therefore not at all. As if the general "Pray on all fit occasions" were nothing.
But these men must know that nature also and reason are God's light, and Providence oft determineth of such subjects and adjuncts: and the general law, and these together, do put all out of doubt. What if God telleth you, He that provideth not for his own, especially those of his household, hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel, and do not tell you either who are your families, and who not, nor what provision you shall make for them, what food, what clothes, or how oft they must feed, &c.; will you say God hath not bid you feed or clothe this child, or that servant? It is enough that God chargeth you to provide for your families, in the Scripture; and that in nature he tell you which are your families, and what provision to make for them, and how oft, and in what quantity, &c. And so if God bid you pray in all places, and at all times, on all occasions, (that are fit for prayer,) and experience and common reason tell you that families afford most fit times, place, and occasions for prayer, is not this enough, that there are such seasons, and opportunities, and occasions for family prayer? I refer you to the particular discoveries of them in the beginning, where I proved the dueness of worship in general to be there performed. And I refer you also to common reason itself, not fearing the contradiction of any man whose impiety hath not made him unreasonable, and prevailed against the common light of nature. This first general argument were enough, if men were not so averse to their duty that they cannot know because they will not: but let us therefore add some more.
Arg.II. If there be many blessings which the family needeth, and which they do actually receive from God, then it is the will of God that the family pray for these blessings when they need them, and give thanks for them when they have received them: but there are many blessings which the family (as conjunct) needeth and receiveth of God. Therefore the family conjunct, and not only particular members secretly, should pray for them and give thanks for them.
The antecedent is past question; 1. The continuance of the family as such in being. 2. In well being. 3. And so the preservation and direction of the essential members. 4. And the prospering of all family affairs are evident instances: and to descend to mere particulars would be needless tediousness. The consequence is proved from many scriptures, which require those that want mercies to ask them, and those that have received them to be thankful for them.Object.So they may do singly.Answ.It is not only as single persons, but as a society, that they receive the mercy; therefore not only as single persons, but as a society, should they pray and give thanks: therefore should they do it in that manner, as may be most fit for a society to do it in, and that is, together conjunctly, that it may be indeed a family sacrifice, and that each part may see that the rest join with them. And especially that the ruler may be satisfied in this, to whom the oversight of the rest is committed: to see that they all join in prayer, which in secret he cannot see, it being not fit that secret prayer should have spectators or witness, that is, should not be secret. But this I intended to make another argument by itself; which because we are fallen on it, I will add next.
Arg.III. If God hath given charge to the ruler of the family to see that the rest do worship him in that family, then ought the ruler to cause them solemnly or openly to join in that worship. But God hath given charge to the ruler of the family, to see that the rest do worship him in that family; therefore, &c.
The reason of the consequence is, because otherwise he can with no convenience see that they do it. For, 1. It is not fit that he should stand by while they pray secretly. 2. Nor are they able vocally to do it, in most families, but have need of a leader; it being not a thing to be expected of every woman, and child, and servant, (that had wanted good education,) that they should be able to pray without a guide, so as is fit for others to hear. 3. It would take almost all the time of the ruler of many families, to go to them one after another, and stand by them while they pray, till all have done: what man in his wits can think this to be so fit a course, as for the family to join together, the ruler being the mouth?
The antecedent I prove thus: 1. The fourth commandment requireth the ruler of the family not only to see that himself sanctify the sabbath day, but also that his son and daughter, and man-servant, and maid-servant, his cattle, (that is, so far as they are capable,) yea, and the stranger that is within his gates, should do it. 2. It was committed to Abraham's charge to see that all in his family were circumcised: so was it afterwards to every ruler of a family; insomuch as the angel threatened Moses, when his son was uncircumcised. 3. The ruler of the family was to see that the "passover" was kept by every one in his family, Exod. xii. 2, 3, &c.; and so the "feast of weeks," Deut. xxvi. 11, 12. All that is said before tendeth to prove this, and much more might be said, if I thought it would be denied.
Arg.IV. If God prefer, and would have us prefer, the prayers and praises of many conjunct, before the prayers and praises of those persons dividedly, then is it his will that the particular persons of christian families should prefer conjunct prayer and praises before disjunct: but the antecedent is true, therefore so is the consequent. Or thus, take it for the same argument or another. If it be the duty of neighbours, when they have occasion and opportunity, rather to join together in praises of common concernment, than to do it dividedly, then much more is this the duty of families: but it is the duty of neighbours; therefore, &c.
In the former argument the reason of the consequence is, because that way is to be taken that God is best pleased with. The reason of the consequence in the latter is, because family members are more nearly related than neighbours, and have much more advantage and opportunity for conjunction, and more ordinary reasons to urge them to it, from the conjunction of their interest and affairs.
There is nothing needs proof but the antecedent, which I shall put past all doubt by these arguments. 1. Col. iii. 16, "Teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts unto the Lord." Here is one duty of praise required to be done together, and not apart only. I shall yet make further use of this text anon. 2. Acts xii. 12, "Many were gathered together praying in Mary's house, when Peter came to the door." This was not an assembly of the whole church, but a small part: they judged it better to pray together than alone. 3. Acts xx. 36, Paul prayed together with all the elders of the church of Ephesus, when he had them with him; and did not choose rather to let them pray each man alone. 4. James v. 15, 16, James commands the sick to "send for the elders of the church, and let them prayover him, and the prayer of the faithful shall save the sick," &c. He doth not bid send to them to pray for you; but he would have them join together in doing it. 5. Church prayers are preferred before private on this ground, and we commanded not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together, Heb. x. 25. 6. Striving together in prayer is desired, Rom. xv. 30. 7. Matt. xviii. 20, "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." 8. Therefore Christ came among the disciples when they were gathered together, after his resurrection: and sent down the Holy Ghost when they were gathered together, Acts ii. "And they continued with one accord in prayer and supplication," Acts i. 14, 24; ii. 42. "And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they had assembled together, and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost," &c. Acts iv. 31. 9. Is not this implied, in Christ's directing his disciples to pray in the plural number, "Our Father," &c. "Give us this day," &c. 10. The very necessity of the persons proves it, in that few societies are such but that most are unable to express their own wants so largely as to affect their hearts, so much as when others do it that are better stored with affection and expression. And this is one of God's ways for communion and communication of grace; that those that have much may help to warm and kindle those that have less. Experience telleth us the benefit of this. As all the body is not an eye or hand, so not a tongue, and therefore the tongue of the church and of the family must speak for the whole body: not but that each one ought to pray in secret too: but, (1.) There the heart without the tongue may better serve turn. (2.) They still ought to prefer conjunct prayer. And, (3.) The communion of saints is an article of our creed, which binds us to acknowledge it fit to do as much of God's work as we can in communion with the saints, not going beyond our callings, nor into confusion.
Arg.V. It is a duty to receive all the mercies that God offereth us: but for a family to have access to God in joint prayers and praises, is a mercy that God offereth them; therefore it is their duty to accept it. The major is clear in nature and Scripture, Because I have offered and ye refused, is God's great aggravation of the sin of the rebellious. "How oft would I have gathered you together, and ye would not! All the day long have I stretched out my hand," &c. To refuse an offered kindness, is contempt and ingratitude. The minor is undeniable by any christian, that ever knew what family prayers and praises were. Who dare say that it is no mercy to have such a joint access to God? Who feels not conjunction somewhat help his own affections, who makes conscience of watching his heart?
Arg.VI. Part of the duties of families are such that they apparently lose their chiefest life and excellency if they be not performed jointly; therefore they are so to be performed.
I mean, singing of psalms, which I before proved an ordinary duty of conjunct christians, therefore of families. The melody and harmony are lost by our separation, and consequently the alacrity and quickening which our affections should get by it. And if part of God's praises must be performed together, it is easy to see that the rest must be so too. (Not to speak of teaching, which cannot be done alone.)
Arg.VII. Family prayer and praises are a duty owned by the teaching and sanctifying work of the Spirit; therefore they are of God.
I would not argue backwards from the Spirit's teaching to the word's commanding, but on these two suppositions; 1. That the experiment is very general, and undeniable. 2. That many texts of Scripture are brought already for family prayer; and that this argument is but to second them and prove them truly interpreted. The Spirit and the word do always agree: if therefore I can prove that the Spirit of God doth commonly work men's hearts to a love and savour of these duties, doubtless they are of God. Sanctification is a transcript of the precepts of the word on the heart, written out by the Spirit of God. So much for the consequence.
The antecedent consisteth of two parts; 1. That the sanctified have in them inclinations to these duties. 2. That these inclinations are from the Spirit of God. The first needs no proof, being a matter of experience. I appeal to the heart of every sound and stable christian, whether he feel not a conviction of this duty and an inclination to the performance of it. I never met with one such to my knowledge that was otherwise minded.Object.Many in our times are quite against family prayer, who are good christians.Answ.I know none of them. I confess I once thought some very good christians that now are against them, but now they appear otherwise, not only by this but by other things. I know none that cast off these duties, but they took up vile sins in their stead, and cast off other duties as well as these: let others observe and judge as they find. 2. The power of delusion may for a time make a christian forbear as unlawful, that which his very new nature is inclined to. As some think it unlawful to pray in our assemblies, and some to join in sacraments: and yet they have a spirit within them that inclineth their hearts to it still, and therefore they love it, and wish it were lawful, even when they forbear it upon a conceit that it is unlawful. And so it is possible for a time some may do by family duties: but as I expect that these ere long recover, so for my part I take all the rest to be graceless: prejudice and error as a temptation may prohibit the exercise of a duty, when yet the Spirit of God doth work in the heart an inclination to that duty in sanctifying it. 2. And that these inclinations are indeed from the Spirit is evident, 1. In that they come in with all other grace. 2. And by the same means. 3. And are preserved by the same means, standing or falling, increasing or decreasing, with the rest. 4. And are to the same end. 5. And are so generally in all the saints. 6. And so resisted by flesh and blood. 7. And so agreeable to the word, that a christian sins against his new nature, when he neglects family duties. And God doth by his Spirit create a desire after them, and an estimation of them in every gracious soul.
Arg.VIII. Family prayer and praises are a duty ordinarily crowned with admirable, divine, and special blessings: therefore it is of God; the consequence is evident. For though common, outward prosperity may be given to the wicked, who have their portion in this life, yet so is not prosperity of soul.
For the antecedent I willingly appeal to the experience of all the holy families in the world. Who ever used these duties seriously, and found not the benefits? What families be they, in which grace and heavenly-mindedness prosper, but those that use these duties? Compare in all your towns, cities, and villages, the families that read Scriptures, pray, and praise God, with those that do not, and see the difference: which of them abound more with impiety, with oaths, and cursings, and railings, and drunkenness, and whoredoms, and worldliness, &c.; and which abound most with faith, and patience, and temperance, and charity, and repentance, and hope, &c. The controversy is not hard to decide. Look to the nobility and gentry of England; seeyou no difference between those that have been bred in praying families and the rest? I mean, taking them (as we say) one with another proportionably. Look to the ministers of England; is it praying families or prayerless families that have done most to the well furnishing of the universities.
Arg.IX. All churches ought solemnly to pray to God and praise him: a christian family is a church; therefore, &c.
The major is past doubt; the minor I prove from the nature of a church in general, which is a society of christians combined for the better worshipping and serving of God. I say not that a family, formally as a family, is a church; but every family of christians ought moreover, by such a combination, to be a church: yea, as christians they are so combined, seeing christianity tieth them to serve God conjunctly together in their relations. 2. Scripture expresseth it; 1 Cor. xvi. 19, "Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house." He saith not, which meeteth in their house, but, which is in it. So Philemon 2, "And to the church in thy house." Rom. xvi. 5, "Likewise greet the church that is in their house." Col. iv. 15, "Salute the brethren that are at Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house." Though some learned men take these to be meant of part of the churches assembling in these houses, yet Beza, Grotius, and many others, acknowledge it to be meant of a family or domestic church, according to that of Tertullian,ubi tres licet laici ibi ecclesia, yet I say not that such a family church is of the same species with a particular organized church of many families. But it could not (so much as analogically) be called a church if they might not and must not pray together, and praise God together: for these therefore it fully concludeth.
Arg.X. If rulers must teach their families the word of God, then must they pray with them: but they must teach them; therefore, &c. The antecedent is fully proved by express Scripture already; see also Psal. lxxviii. 4-6. Ministers must teach from house to house; therefore rulers themselves must do it, Acts v. 42; xx. 20.
The consequence is proved good: 1. The apostles prayed when they preached or instructed christians in private assemblies, Acts xx. 36, and other places. 2. We have special need of God's assistance in reading the Scriptures, to know his mind in them, and to make them profitable to us; therefore we must seek it. 3. The reverence due to so holy a business requireth it. 4. We are commanded "in all things to make our requests known to God with prayers, supplications, and thanksgiving, and that with all manner of prayer, in all places, without ceasing;" therefore especially on such occasions as the reading of Scriptures and instructing others: and I think that few men that are convinced of the duty of reading Scripture and solemn instructing their families, will question the duty of praying for God's blessing on it, when they set upon the work. Yea, a christian's own conscience will provoke him reverently to begin all with God in the imploring of his acceptance, and aid, and blessing.
Arg.XI. If rulers of families are bound to teach their families to pray, then are they bound to pray with them: but they are bound to teach them to pray; therefore, &c.
In the foregoing argument I speak of teaching in general: here I speak of teaching to pray in special. The antecedent of the major I prove thus: 1. They are bound to bring "them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord," Eph. vi. 44; therefore to teach them to pray and praise God; for "the nurture and admonition of the Lord" containeth that. 2. They are bound to "teach them the fear of the Lord," and "train them up in the way that they should go," and that is doubtless in the way of prayer and praising God.
The consequence appeareth here to be sound, in that men cannot be well and effectually taught to pray, without praying with them, or in their hearing; therefore they that must teach them to pray, must pray with them. It is like music, which you cannot well teach any man, without playing or singing to him; seeing teaching must be by practising: and in most practical doctrines it is so in some degree.
If any question this, I appeal to experience. I never knew any man that was well taught by man to pray, without practising it before them. They that ever knew any such, may have the more colour to object; but I did not: or if they did, yet so rare a thing is not to be made the ordinary way of our endeavours, any more than we should forbear teaching men the most curious artifices by ocular demonstration, because some wits have learned them by few words, or of their own invention: they are cruel to children and servants that teach them not to pray by practice and example.
Arg.XII. From 1 Tim. iv. 3-5, "Meats which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving—for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer."
Here mark, 1. That all our meat is to be received with thanksgiving; not only with a disposition of thankfulness. 2. That this is twice repeated here together expressly, yea, thrice in sense. 3. That God created them so to be received. 4. That it is made a condition of the goodness, that is, the blessing of the creature to our use. 5. That the creature is said to be sanctified by God's word and prayer; and so to be unsanctified to us before. 6. That the same thing which is called thanksgiving in the two former verses, is called prayer in the last; else the consequence of the apostle could not hold, when he thus argues, It is good if it be received with thanksgiving, because it is sanctified by prayer.
Hence I will draw these two arguments: 1. If families must with thanksgiving receive their meat as from God, then is the thanksgiving of families a duty of God's appointment: but the former is true, therefore so is the latter. The antecedent is plain: all must receive their meat with thanksgiving; therefore families must. They eat together; therefore they must give thanks together: and that prayer is included in thanksgiving in this text, I manifested before.
2. It is the duty of families to use means that all God's creatures may be sanctified to them: prayer is the means to be used that all God's creatures may be sanctified to them; therefore it is the duty of families to use prayer.
Arg.XIII. From 1 Pet. iii. 7, "Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour to the wife as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers be not hindered." That prayer which is especially hindered by ignorant and unkind converse it is, that is especially meant here in this text: but it is conjunct prayer that is especially so hindered; therefore, &c. I know that secret, personal prayer is also hindered by the same causes; but not so directly and notably as conjunct prayer is. With what hearts can husband and wife join together as one soul in prayer to God, when they abuse and exasperate each other, and come hot from chidings and dissensions? This seemeth the true meaning of the text. And so, the conjunct prayer of husband and wife being proved a duty, (who sometimes constitutea family,) the same reasons will include the rest of the family also.
Arg.XIV. From Col. iii. 16, 17, to iv. 4, "Let the word of God dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord: and whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus; giving thanks to God and the Father by him. Wives, submit yourselves," &c. Chap. iv. 2, "Continue in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving."
Hence I may fetch many arguments for family prayers. 1. It appeareth to be family prayers principally that the apostle here speaketh of; for it is families that he speaks to: for in ver. 16, 17, he speaketh of prayer and thanksgiving; and in the next words he speaketh to each family relation, wives, husbands, children, parents, servants, masters; and in the next words, continuing his speech to the same persons, he bids them "continue in prayer, and watch in the same," &c. If neighbours are bound to speak together in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, with grace in their hearts to the Lord, and to continue in prayer and thanksgiving; then families much more, who are nearlier related, and have more necessities and opportunities, as is said before. 3. If whatever we do in word or deed, we must do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks; then families must needs join in giving thanks. For they have much daily business in word and deed to be done together and asunder.
Arg.XV. From Dan. vi. 10, "When Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went into his house, and his window being open in his chamber towards Jerusalem, he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime. Then these men assembled, and found Daniel praying and making supplication before his God." Here note, 1. The nature of the duty. 2. The necessity of it. 1. If it had not been open, family prayer which Daniel here performed, how could they have known what he said? It is not probable that he would speak so loud in secret; nor is it like they would have found him at it. So great a prince would have had some servants in his outward rooms, to have stayed them before they had come so near. 2. And the necessity of this prayer is such, that Daniel would not omit it for a few days to save his life.
Arg.XVI. From Josh. xxiv. 15, "But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord." Here note, 1. That it is a household that is here engaged: for if any would prove that it extendeth further, to all Joshua's tribe, or inferior kindred, yet his household would be most eminently included. 2. That it is the same thing which Joshua promiseth for his house, which he would have all Israel do for theirs: for he maketh himself an example to move them to it.
If households must serve the Lord, then households must pray to him and praise him: but households must serve him; therefore, &c. The consequence is proved, in that prayer and praise are so necessary parts of God's service, that no family or person can be said in general to be devoted to serve God, that are not devoted to them. Calling upon God is oft put in Scripture for all God's worship, as being a most eminent part; and atheists are described to be such as "call not upon the Lord," Psal. xiv. &c.
Arg.XVII. The story of Cornelius, Acts x. proveth that he performed family worship: for observe, 1. That, ver. 2, he is said to be "a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God always:" and ver. 30, he saith, "At the ninth hour I prayed in my house:" and ver. 24, "he called together his kindred and near friends:" so ver. 11, 14, "Thou and all thy house shall he saved:" so that in ver. 2, fearing God comprehendeth prayer, and is usually put for all God's worship; therefore when he is said to fear God with all his house, it is included that he worshipped God with all his house: and that he used to do it conjunctly with them is implied, in his gathering together his kindred and friends when Peter came, not mentioning the calling together his household, as being usual and supposed. And when it is said that he prayedἐν τῷ οἴκῳ, in his house, it may signify his household, as in Scripture the word is often taken. However, the circumstances show that he did it.
Arg.XVIII. From 1 Tim. iii. 4, 5, 12, "One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection, with all gravity: for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God: let the deacons be the husbands of one wife; ruling their children and their own houses well." Here mark, that it is such a ruling of their houses, as is of the same nature as the ruling of the church,mutatis mutandis, and that is, a training them up in the worship of God, and guiding them therein; for the apostle maketh the defect of the one, to be a sure discovery of their unfitness for the other. Now to rule the church, is to teach and guide them as their mouth in prayer and praises unto God, as well as to oversee their lives; therefore it is such a ruling of their houses as is prerequisite to prove them fit.
They that must so rule well over their own houses, as may partly prove them not unfit to rule the church, must rule them by holy instructions, and guiding them as their mouth in the worship of God. But those mentioned 1 Tim. iii. must so rule their houses; therefore, &c.
The pastors' ruling of the church doth most consist in going before them, and guiding them in God's worship; therefore so doth the ruling of their own houses, which is made a trying qualification of their fitness hereunto. Though yet it reach not so high, nor to so many things, and the conclusion be not affirmative, He that ruleth his own house well is fit to rule the church of God; but negative, He that ruleth not his own house well, is not fit to rule the church of God; but that is because, 1. This is a lower degree of ruling, which will not prove him fit for a higher. 2. And it is but one qualification of many that are requisite. Yet it is apparent that some degree of aptitude is proved hence, and that from a similitude of the things. When Paul compareth ruling the house to ruling the church, he cannot be thought to take them to be wholly heterogeneous: he would never have said, He that cannot rule an army, or regiment, or a city, how shall he rule the church of God? I conclude therefore that this text doth show that it is the duty of masters of families, to rule well their own families in the right worshipping of God,mutatis mutandis, as ministers must rule the church.
Arg.XIX. If families have special necessity of family prayer conjunctly, which cannot be supplied otherwise; then it is God's will that family prayer should be in use: but families have such necessities; therefore, &c. The consequent needs no proof; the antecedent is proved by instance. Families have family necessities, which are larger than to be confined to a closet, and yet more private than to be brought still into the assemblies of the church. 1. There are many worldly occasions about their callings and relations, which it is fit for them to mentionamong themselves, but unfit to mention before all the congregation. 2. There are many distempers in the hearts and lives of the members of the families, and many miscarriages, and disagreements, which must be taken up at home, and which prayer must do much to cure, and yet are not fit to be brought to the ears of the church assemblies. 3. And if it were fit to mention them all in public, yet the number of such cases would be so great, as would overwhelm the minister, and confound the public worship; nay, one half of them in most churches could not be mentioned. 4. And such cases are of ordinary occurrence, and therefore would ordinarily have all these inconveniencies.
And yet there are many such cases that are not fit to be confined to our secret prayers each one by himself; because, 1. They often so sin together, as maketh it fit that they confess and lament it together. 2. And some mercies which they receive together, it is fit they seek and give thanks for together. 3. And many works which they do together, it is fit they seek a blessing on together. 4. And the presence of one another in confession, petition, and thanksgiving, doth tend to the increase of their fervour, and warming of their hearts, and engaging them the more to duty, and against sin; and is needful on the grounds laid down before. Nay, it is a kind of family schism, in such cases, to separate from one another, and to pray in secret only; as it is church schism to separate from the church assemblies, and to pray in families only. Nature and grace delight in unity, and abhor division. And the light of nature and grace engageth us to do as much of the work of God in unity, and concord, and communion as we can.
Arg.XX. If before the giving of the law to Moses, God was worshipped in families by his own appointment, and this appointment be not yet reversed, then God is to be worshipped in families still. But the antecedent is certain; therefore so is the consequent.
I think no man denieth the first part of the antecedent; that before the flood in the families of the righteous, and after till the establishment of a priesthood, God was worshipped in families or households: it is a greater doubt whether then he had any other public worship. When there were few or no church assemblies that were larger than families, no doubt God was ordinarily worshipped in families. Every ruler of a family then was as a priest to his own family. Cain and Abel offered their own sacrifices; so did Noah, Abraham, and Jacob.
If it be objected, that all this ceased, when the office of the priest was instituted, and so deny the latter part of my antecedent, I reply, 1. Though some make a doubt of it, whether the office of the priesthood was instituted before Aaron's time, I think there is no great doubt to be made of it; seeing we find a priesthood then among other nations, who had it either by the light of nature, or by tradition from the church; and Melchizedec's priesthood (who was a type of Christ) is expressly mentioned. So that though family worship was then the most usual, yet some more public worship there was. 2. After the institution of Aaron's priesthood family-worship continued, as I have proved before; yea, the two sacraments of circumcision and the passover, were celebrated in families by the master of the house; therefore prayer was certainly continued in families. 3. If that part of worship that was afterward performed in synagogues and public assemblies was appropriated to them, that no whit proveth, that the part which agreed to families as such, was transferred to those assemblies. Nay, it is a certain proof that part was left to families still, because we find that the public assemblies never undertook it. We find among them no prayer but church prayer; and not that which was fitted to families as such at all. Nor is there a word of Scripture that speaketh of God's reversing of his command or order for family prayer, or other proper family worship. Therefore it is proved to continue obligatory still.
Had I not been too long already, I should have urged to this end the example of Job, in sacrificing daily for his sons; and of Esther's keeping a fast with her maids, Esth. iv. 16. And Jer. x. 25, "Pour out thy fury on the heathen that know thee not, and on the families that call not on thy name." It is true that by "families" here is meant tribes of people, and by "calling on his name," is meant their worshipping the true God. But yet this is spoken of all tribes without exception, great and small: and tribes in the beginning (as Abraham's, Isaac's, Jacob's, &c.) were confined to families. And the argument holdeth from parity of reason to a proper family: and that calling on God's name is put for his worship, doth more confirm us, because it proveth it to be the most eminent part of worship, or else the whole would not be signified by it; at least no reason can imagine it excluded. So much for the proof of the fourth proposition.
Object.I. Had it been a duty under the gospel to pray in families, we should certainly have found it more expressly required in the Scripture.
Answ.1. I have already showed you, that it is plainly required in the Scripture: but men must not teach God how to speak, nor oblige him to make all plain to blind, perverted minds. 2. Those things which were plainly revealed in the Old Testament, and the church then held without any contradiction, even from the persecutors of Christ themselves, might well be passed over in the gospel, and taken as supposed, acknowledged things. 3. The general precepts (to "pray alway,—with all prayer,—in all places," &c.) being expressed in the gospel, and the light of nature making particular application of them to families, what need there any more? 4. This reason is apparent why Scripture speaketh of it no more expressly. Before Christ's time the worship of God was less spiritual, and more ceremonial, than afterward it was; and therefore you find ofter mention of circumcision and sacrificing, than of prayer; and yet prayer was still supposed to concur. And after Christ's time on earth, most christian families were disturbed by persecution, and christians sold up all and lived in community: and also the Scripture history was to describe to us the state of the churches, rather than of particular families.
Object.II. Christ himself did not use to pray with his family; as appeareth by the disciples asking him to teach them to pray, and by the silence of the Scripture in this point: therefore it is no duty to us.
Answ.1. Scripture silence is no proof that Christ did not use it. All things are not written which he did. 2. His teaching them the Lord's prayer, and their desire of a common rule of prayer, might consist with his usual praying with them: at least with his using to pray with them after that, though at first he did not use it. 3. But it is the consequence that I principally deny. (1.) Because Christ did afterwards call his servants to many duties, which he put them not on at first, as sacraments, discipline, preaching, frequenter praying, &c. especially after the coming down of the Holy Ghost. As they understood not many articles of the faith till then, so no wonder if they understood not many duties tillthen; for Christ would have them thus suddenly instructed and fullier sanctified by a miracle, that their ministry might be more credible, their mission being evidently divine, and they being past the suspicion of forgery and deceit. (2.) And though it is evident that Christ did use to bless the meat, and sing hymns to God with his disciples, Luke xxii. 17, 18; Mark xiv. 22, 23, 26; Matt. xxvi. 27, 28, 30, and therefore it is very probable, prayed with them often, as John xvii.; yet it could not be expected, that he should ordinarily be their mouth in such prayers as they daily needed. His case and ours are exceedingly different. His disciples must daily confess their sins, and be humbled for them, and ask forgiveness; but Christ had none of this to do. They must pray for mortifying grace, and help against sin; but he had no sin to mortify or pray against. They must pray for the Spirit, and the increase of their imperfect graces; but Christ had fulness and perfection. They must pray for many means to these ends, and for help in using them, and a blessing on them, which he had no use for. They must give thanks for pardon and conversion, &c. which Christ had no occasion to give thanks for. So that having a High Priest so much separate from sinners, they had one that prayed for them; but not one fit to join with them as their mouth to God, in ordinary family prayers, such as they needed; as masters must do with their families.
Object.III. God doth not require either vain or abominable prayers; but family prayers are ordinarily vain and abominable; therefore, &c. The minor is proved thus:—The prayers of the wicked are abominable: most families are wicked, or have wicked persons; therefore, &c.
Answ.1. This is confessedly nothing against the prayers of godly families. 2. The prayers of a godly master are not abominable nor vain, because of the presence of others that are ungodly. Else Christ's prayers and blessings before mentioned should have been vain or abominable, because Judas was there, who was a thief and hypocrite. And the apostles' and all ministers' prayers should be so in all such churches as those of Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus are described to have been. 3. I refer you to my "Method for Peace of Conscience," how far the prayers of the wicked are, or are not abominable. The prayers of the wicked as wicked are abominable; but not as they express their return to God, and repenting of their wickedness. It is not the abominable prayer that God commandeth, but the faithful, penitent prayer. You mistake it, as if the wicked man were not the person commanded to pray; whereas you should rather say, It is not the abominable prayer that is commanded him. He is commanded to pray such prayers as are not abominable; even as Simon Magus, Acts viii. to "repent" and "pray;" and "to seek the Lord while he may be found, and call upon him while he is near, and to forsake his way," &c. Isa. lv. 6, 7. Let the wicked pray thus, and his prayer will not be abominable. The command of praying implieth the command of repenting and departing from his wickedness: for what is it to pray for grace, but to express to God their desires of grace? (It is not to tell God a lie, by saying they desire that which they hate.) Therefore when we exhort them to pray we exhort them to such desires.
Object.IV. Many masters of families cannot pray in their families without a book, and that is unlawful.
Answ.I. If their disability be natural, as an idiot's, they are not fit to rule families; if it be moral and culpable, they are bound to use the means to overcome it; and in the mean time to use a book or form, rather than not to pray in their families at all.