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 shew 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 familyprayer 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 inconveniences.

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. 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 churchassemblies, 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. Eve ry 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, Est. 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. 1. 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 shewed 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 past 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. 11. '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 more fully sanctified by a mi

racle, 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 P, 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 and 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 re

P Luke xxii, 17, 18. Mark xiv. 22, 23. 26. Matt. xxvi. 27, 28. 30.