A DISPUTATION, OR ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE NECESSITY OF FAMILY WORSHIP
AND HOLINESS, OR DIRECTIONS AGAINST THE CAVILS OF THE PROFANE, AND
SOME SECTARIES, WHO DENY IT TO BE A THING REQUIRED BY GOD.
_Whether the solemn Worship of God, in and by Families as such, be
of Divine Appointment? Aff._
THAT excellent speech of Mirandula is oft in mind, _Veritatem
philosophia quærit, theologia invenit, religio possidet_. I do
therefore with greater alacrity and delight dispute these points that
are directly religious, that is, immediately practical, than those
that are only remotely such: and though I am loth we should see among
us any wider division _inter philosophum theologum et religiosum_,
than between the fantasy, the intellect, and the will, which never are
found disjunct in any act; or rather, than between the habits of
practical natural knowledge, and the habits of practical supernatural
knowledge, and the practical resolutions, affections, and endeavours,
into which both the former are devolved; yet may we safely and
profitably distinguish, where it would be mortal to divide. If
disputing in our present case, do but tend to, and end in, a religious
performance, we shall then be able to say, we disputed not in vain;
when by experience of the delight and profit of God's work, we
perceive that we do not worship him in vain: otherwise to evince by a
dispute, that God should be worshipped, and not to worship him when we
have done, is but to draw forth our learning, and sharpen our wits, to
plead for our condemnation; as if the accuser wanted our help, or the
Judge of all the world did want evidence or arguments against us,
unless he had it from our own mouth. Concerning the sense of the
terms, I shall say somewhat, both as to the subject, and the
predicate, that we contend not in the dark; and yet but little, lest I
trouble myself and you with needless labours.
1. By the worship of God we mean not only, nor principally, obedience
as such, or service in common things, called Δουλεία: but we mean a
religious performance of some sacred actions, with an intention of
honouring God as God; and that more directly than in common works of
obedience. This being commonly called Λατρεία, is by Austin, and
since him by all the orthodox, appropriated to God alone; and indeed
to give it to any other is contradictory to its definition.
This worship is of two sorts, whereof the first is by an excellency
called worship, viz. When the honouring of God is so directly the end
and whole business of the work, that our own advantage falls in but
impliedly, and in evident subordination: such are the blessed works of
praise and thanksgiving, which we here begin and shall in heaven
perpetuate. Yet see a more admirable mystery of true religion; we
indeed receive more largely from God, and enjoy more fully our own
felicity in him, in these acts of worship, that give all to God, than
in the other, wherein we more directly seek for somewhat from him. And
those are the second sort of worship actions, viz. When the substance
or matter of the work is a seeking or receiving somewhat from God, or
delivering something religiously in his name, and so is more directly
for ourselves; though yet it is God that should be our ultimate end in
this too. You may perceive I make this of three sorts. Whereof the
first consisteth in our religious addresses to God for something that
we want; and is called prayer. The second consisteth in our religious
addresses to God to receive somewhat from him; viz. 1. Instructions,
precepts, promises, threatenings, from his mouth, messengers, &c. 2.
The sacramental signs of his grace in baptism and the Lord's supper.
The third is, when the officers of Christ do in his name solemnly
deliver either his laws or sacraments. His laws either in general by
ordinary preaching, or by a more particular application in acts of
discipline.
2. The word solemn signifies sometimes any thing usual, and so some
derive it, _Solenne est quod fieri solet_. Sometimes that which
is done but on one set day in the year; and so some make
_solenne_ to be _quasi solum semel in anno_. But vulgarly it
is taken, and so we take it here, for both _celebre et usitatum_,
that is, a thing that is not accidentally and seldom, but statedly and
ordinarily to be done, and that with such gravity and honourable
seriousness as beseems a business of such weight.
3. By family we mean, not a tribe or stock of kindred, dwelling in
many houses, as the word is taken oft in Scripture, but I mean a
household.
_Domus et familia_, a household and family, are indeed in economics
somewhat different notions, but one thing. _Domus_ is to _familia_ as
_civitas_ to _respublica_, the former is made the subject of the
latter, the latter the _finis internus_ of the former. And so _Domus
est societas naturæ consentanea, e personis domesticis, vitæ in dies
omnes commode sustentandæ causa, collecta. Familia est ordo domus per
regimen patris-familias in personas sibi subjectas_.
Where note, that to a complete family must go four integral parts,
_Pater-familias_, _mater-familias_, _filius_, _servus_, A father,
mother, son, and servant. But to the essence of a family it sufficeth
if there be but the _pars imperans, et pars subdita_, one head or
governor, either father, mother, master, or mistress; and one or more
governed under this head.
Note therefore, that the governor is an essential part of the family,
and so are some of the governed, (viz. that such there be,) but not
each member. If therefore twenty children or servants shall worship
God without the father, or master of the family, either present
himself, or in some representative, it is not a family worship in
strict sense. But if the head of the family in himself (or delegate or
representative) be present, with any of his children or servants,
though all the rest be absent, it is yet a family duty; though the
family be incomplete and maimed (and so is the duty therefore, if
culpably so performed).
4. When I say in and by a family, I mean not that each must do the
same parts of the work, but that one (either the head, or some one
deputed by him, and representing him) be the mouth, and the rest
performing their parts by receiving instructions, or mentally
concurring in the prayers and praise by him put up. Lastly, By divine
appointment I mean any signification of God's will, that it is men's
duty to perform this; whether a signification by natural means or
supernatural, directly or by consequence, so we may be sure it is
God's will. The sum of the question then is, whether any sacred
actions religiously and ordinarily to be performed to God's honour by
the head of the family, with the rest, be by God's appointment made
our duty? My thoughts of this question I shall reduce to these heads,
and propound in this order. 1. I shall speak of family worship in
general. 2. Of the sorts of that worship in special. 3. Of the time.
I. Concerning the first, I lay down my thoughts in these propositions
following, for limitation and caution, and then prove the main
conclusion.
_Prop._ 1. It is not all sorts of God's worship which he hath
appointed to be performed by families as such; there being some proper
to more public assemblies.
2. More particularly the administration of the sacraments of baptism
and the Lord's supper, are proper to the ministerial or organized
churches, and not common to families: for as they are both of them
committed only to ministers of the gospel, and have been only used by
them for many hundred years in the church; (except that some permitted
others to baptize in case of necessity); so the Lord's supper was
appointed for a symbol and means of a more public communion than that
of families. And though some conjecture the contrary, from its first
institution, and think that as there is a family prayer and church
prayer, family teaching and church teaching, so there should be family
sacraments and church sacraments, yet it is a mistake. For though
Christ administered it to his family, yet it was not as a family, but
as a church. For that which is but one family may possibly be a church
also. This exposition we have from the doctrine and practice of the
apostles, and constant custom of all the churches, which have never
thought the Lord's supper to be a family duty, but proper to larger
assemblies, and administrable only by ordained ministers. Nor will the
reasons drawn from circumcision and the passover prove the contrary:
both because particular churches were not then instituted as now, and
therefore families had the more to do; and because there were some
duties proper to families in the very institution of those sacraments;
and because God gave them a power in those, which he hath not given to
masters of families now in our sacraments.
3. Many thousands do by their own viciousness and negligence disable
themselves, so that they cannot perform what God hath made their duty;
yet it remains their duty still: some disability may excuse them in
part, but not in whole.
I shall now prove, that the solemn worship of God in and by families
as such, is of divine appointment.
_Argument_ I. If families are societies of God's institution,
furnished with special advantages and opportunities for God's solemn
worship, having no prohibition so to use them; then the solemn worship
of God in and by families as such, is of divine appointment. But the
antecedent is true; therefore so is the consequent.
For the parts of the antecedent; 1. That families are societies of
God's institution, needeth no proof.
2. That they are furnished with special advantages and opportunities
may appear by an enumeration of particulars. (1.) There is the
advantage of authority in the ruler of the family, whereby he may
command all that are under him in God's worship, yea, and may inflict
penalties on children and servants that refuse; yea, may cast some out
of the family if they be obstinate. (2.) He hath the advantage of a
singular interest in wife and children, by which he may bring them to
it willingly, that so they may perform a right evangelical worship.
(3.) He hath the advantage of a singular dependence of all upon him
for daily provisions; and of his children for their portions for
livelihood in the world, whereby he may yet further prevail with them
for obedience; he having a power to reward, as well as to punish and
command. (4.) They have the opportunity of cohabitation, and so are
still at hand, and more together, and so in readiness for such
employments. (5.) Being nearest in relation, they are stronglier
obliged to further each other's salvation, and help each other in
serving God. (6.) They have hereby an advantage against all prejudices
and jealousies, which strangeness and mistakes may raise and cherish
among those that live at a greater distance, and so may close more
heartily in God's worship. And their nearness of relation and natural
affections do singularly advantage them for a more affectionate
conjunction, and so for a more forcible and acceptable worship of God,
when they are in it as of one heart and soul. (7.) If any
misunderstanding or other impediment arise, they being still at hand,
have opportunity to remove them, and to satisfy each other; and if any
distempers of understanding, heart, or life, be in the family, the
ruler, by familiarity and daily converse, is enabled more particularly
to fit his reproofs and exhortations, confessions and petitions,
accordingly, which even ministers in the congregations cannot so well
do. So that I have made it evident in this enumeration, that families
have advantages, yea, special and most excellent advantages and
opportunities for the solemn worship of God.
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 his _jus 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 argue _a 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's worship. 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 argument _a 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 than _mediante 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 (of which 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 of worship; 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; and νουθεσία, 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 word ἐκτρέφετε, 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 pray over 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; see
you 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 constitute a 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 prayed ἐν 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 mention among 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.
_Objections answered._
_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 till then; 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.
_Of the Frequency and Seasons of Family worship._
The last part of my work is to speak of the fit time of family
worship. 1. Whether it should be every day? 2. Whether twice a day? 3.
Whether morning and evening? _Answ._ 1. Ordinarily it should be
every day and twice a day; and the morning and evening are ordinarily
the fittest seasons. 2. But extraordinarily some greater duty may
intervene, which may for that time disoblige us. And the occasions of
some families may make that hour fit to one, which is unfit to
another. For brevity I will join all together in the proof.
_Arg._ I. We are bound to take all fit occasions and opportunities to
worship God. Families have daily (morning and evening) such occasions
and opportunities; therefore they are bound to take them.
Both major and minor are proved before. Experience proveth that family
sins are daily committed, and family mercies daily received, and
family necessities daily do occur. And reason tells us, 1. That it is
seasonable every morning to give God thanks for the rest of the night
past. 2. And to beg direction, protection, and provisions, and
blessing for the following day. 3. And that then our minds are freest
from weariness and worldly care. And so reason telleth us that the
evening is a fit season to give God thanks for the mercies of the day,
and to confess the sins of the day, and ask forgiveness, and to pray
for rest and protection in the night. As nature and reason tell us how
oft a man should eat and drink, and how long he should sleep, and what
clothing he should wear; and Scripture need not tell you the
particulars: so if Scripture command your prayer in general, God may
by providence tell you when and how oft you must pray.
_Arg._ II. The Lord's prayer directeth us daily to put up such
prayers as belong to families; therefore, &c. "Give us this day our
daily bread." It runs all in the plural number. And the reason of it
will oblige families as well as individual persons.
_Arg._ III. From 1 Thess. v. 17, "Pray without ceasing; in all
things give thanks." Col. iv. 1, 2, "Masters, give to your servants
that which is just and equal, knowing that ye also have a Master in
heaven. Continue in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving."
Col. iii. 17, "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." Phil.
iv. 6, "Be careful for nothing, but in every thing by prayer and
supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to
God." It is easy for a man that is willing to see that less than
twice a day doth not answer the command of praying "without
ceasing,--continually,--in every thing--whatsoever ye do," &c.; the
phrases seeming to go much higher.
_Arg._ IV. Daniel prayed in his house thrice a day; therefore less
than twice under the gospel is to us unreasonable.
_Arg._ V. 1 Tim. iv. 5, "She that is a widow indeed and desolate,
trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayer night and
day." Night and day can be no less than morning and evening. And if
you say, this is not family prayer, I answer, 1. It is all kind of
prayer belonging to her. 2. And if it commend the less, much more the
greater.
_Arg._ VI. From Luke vi. 14; ii. 37; xviii. 17; Acts xxvi. 7;
1 Thess. iii. 10; 2 Tim. i. 3: Rev. vii. 15; Neh. i. 6; Psal.
lxxxviii. 1; Josh. i. 8; Psal. i. 2; which show that night and day
Christ himself prayed, and his servants prayed, and meditated, and
read the Scripture.
_Arg._ VII. Deut. vi. 7; xi. 19, it is expressly commanded that
parents teach their children the word of God, when they "lie down, and
when they rise up;" and the parity of reason, and conjunction of the
word and prayer, will prove, that they should also pray with them
lying down and rising up.
_Arg._ VIII. For brevity sake I offer you together, Psal. cxix. 164,
David praised God seven times a day; and cxlv. 2, "Every day will
I bless thee." Psal. v. 3, "My voice shalt thou hear in the morning, O
Lord; in the morning will I direct my prayer to thee, and will look
up:" lix. 16, "I will sing aloud of thy mercy in the morning:"
lxxxviii. 13, "In the morning shall my prayer prevent thee:" xcii. 12,
"It is good to give thanks unto the Lord, and to sing praises to thy
name, O Most High: to show forth thy loving-kindness in the morning,
and thy faithfulness every night:" cxix. 147, 148, "I prevented the
dawning of the morning and cried, I hoped in thy word: mine eyes
prevent the night watches, that I might meditate on thy word:" cxxx. 6,
"My soul waiteth for the Lord more than they that watch for the
morning, I say more than they that watch for the morning." The priests
were to offer "sacrifices" and "thanks to God every morning," 1 Chron.
xxiii. 30; Exod. xxx. 7; xxxvi. 3; Lev. vi. 12; 2 Chron. xiii. 11;
Ezek. xlvi. 13-15; Amos iv. 4. And christians are a "holy priesthood,
to offer up sacrifices to God, acceptable through Jesus Christ,"
1 Pet. ii. 5, 9. Expressly saith David, Psal. lv. 17, "Evening, and
morning, and at noon, will I pray and cry aloud, and he shall hear my
voice." So morning and evening were sacrifices and burnt offerings
offered to the Lord; and there is at least equal reason that gospel
worship should be as frequent: 1 Chron. xvi. 40; 2 Chron. ii. 4;
xiii. 11; xxxi. 3; Ezra iii. 3; 2 Kings xvi. 15; 1 Kings xviii.
29, 36; Ezra ix. 5. And no doubt but they prayed with the sacrifices.
Which David intimateth in comparing them, Psal. cxli. 2, "Let my
prayer be set forth before thee as incense, and the lifting up of my
hands as the evening sacrifice." And God calleth for prayer and praise
as better than sacrifice, Psal. l. 14, 15, 23.
All these I heap together for despatch, which fully show how
frequently God's servants have been wont to worship him, and how often
God expecteth it. And you will all confess that it is reason that in
gospel times of greater light and holiness, we should not come behind
them in the times of the law; especially when Christ himself doth pray
all night, that had so little need in comparison of us. And you may
observe that these scriptures speak of prayer in general, and limit it
not to secrecy; and therefore they extend to all prayer, according to
opportunity. No reason can limit all these examples to the most secret
and least noble sort of prayer. If but two or three are gathered
together in his name, Christ is especially among them.
If you say, that by this rule we must as frequently pray in the church
assemblies; I answer, the church cannot ordinarily so oft assemble;
but when it can be without a great inconvenience, I doubt not but it
would be a good work, for many to meet the minister daily for prayer,
as in some rich and populous cities they may do.
I have been more tedious on this subject than a holy, hungry christian
possibly may think necessary, who needeth not so many arguments to
persuade him to feast his soul with God, and to delight himself in the
frequent exercises of faith and love; and if I have said less than the
other sort of readers shall think necessary, let them know that if
they will open their eyes, and recover their appetites, and feel their
sins, and observe their daily wants and dangers, and get but a heart
that loveth God, these reasons then will seem sufficient to convince
them of so sweet, and profitable, and necessary a work; and if they
observe the difference between praying and prayerless families, and
care for their souls and communion with God, much fewer words than
these may serve their turn. It is a dead, and graceless, carnal heart,
that must be cured before these men will be well satisfied; a better
appetite would help their reason. If God should say in general to all
men, You shall eat as oft as will do you good; the sick stomach would
say, Once a day, and that but a little, is enough, and as much as God
requireth; when another would say, Thrice a day is little enough. A
good and healthful heart is a great help, in the expounding of God's
word, especially of his general commandments. That which men love not,
but are weary of, they will not easily believe to be their duty. The
new nature, and holy love, and desires, and experience of a sound
believer, do so far make all these reasonings needless to him, that I
must confess I have written them principally to convince the carnal
hypocrite, and stop the mouths of wrangling enemies.