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 fa mily 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 1. 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 dependance 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 more strongly 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 re

move 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 shew 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. 1. 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 às 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, (1.) From Matt. xxv. throughout, especially from verse 14. to verse 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 asketha." His stewards must give an account of their stewardships. Christ telleth us of all our talents in general, that, "Unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him will they ask the more." And of our words in particular Christ tells us, 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" 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. Many more of the like Scriptures prove the antecedent of the enthymeme, and the consequent needs no proof.

66

Arg. 11. 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 and 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, “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

f Mal. i. 6.