A 'Difputation for Fami~,Wo1jhip. fuy pans of Gods fcrvice, that n~ family or perfon can be .fai~ i~1 general ro ~e dcvo~t:d r_o flrve G_ud, that are not devoted to them; CaLing upun God, IS oft put 10 Scnpture, for an God! Tf o_rfhzp, as bemg a rnofi <tmincnt part ; and AthciHs arc defcribcd to be fuch as calL not upm tiJt Lord, Pfal. 14, &c. Argument I7· Tht fiory o_f C?rmlius Alir ro. proveth that he pcrlormcd family:wor~i~: For obfervc I· That vcrfe 2- he IS fa1d fO be [A devoUt ma1t, and one that feat·ed God n:uh <Jli hu hou{t, Jr!hich g~vc m~tcb almcJ_to tbe people, andpraJ•td ~a God alwa~1 :]. And vtrf. 30. h~ fairh [at tbe nintb hour I pra;•ed i1t my h011je. J And vt r-24- Lbt caU~d togetbtr hu ~ndred and near [rwtd.r.] So vc:!-1,1 o11· [ 1hou and a_Y thy houfc jhaU bt_favcd J So that m ver. ~· F_carmg God, comprehende.th Pra.,yer~ ~n~ JS ufually put tor <JH Gods WorOHp; tht:rcfore wher. he IS fa1d to Fear6od wah all h:s hou(e, It IS m– clud<d that he worO,ipped God with all his houfc : And that he ufcd ro do it conjunctly with them is implycd, in his garht.ring wgcrher his Kindred and Friends when Peter came, not mentioning the calling together his boHjhold, as being ufual and fuppofcd. And when it is faid that he prayf:d i,, nj Ou~..,, in hi1 houjt, ic may tigniti~ his ho:tjhold, as inScripture the word is often taken. How· ever the: circumRancts {hew that he did it. Argument 18. 1.-'rom 1 Tim. 3· 4, 5, 12. One that rulctb r:rtlJ h~r own ho1lje, baving hit children iJz. {ubjd1ion with all wavity: For if a man know not how to rule IJJs otJJn hnufi, bow.fhaU he t.Jk,_t catt of tht Ch~rcb ofG,,d: Let theDeacons be the fllubands of one 'f'l'ife: Ruling thtir Children and their Oll'n houfes wcU. Here m.uk, that it isfuch a Rutin~ of the~r !Jou{cs, as is o~ the fame na.turt as theRule– ing of the Church, mmaJU m11tandU; and that ts, a trammg them up 1n the Wor!lu.p of God! an~ guiding them therein. For the ApoOie mak<th the defect of the one, to be a fure dtfcovery ot thetr unfirnefs for the other. Now eo Rule the Cburch, is to teach and guide them as their mouth in prayer and praifes unto God, as well as ro overfee their livc!i ; therefore it is fuch a Ruling of their houfcs as is pre·nquilite to prove them fit. They that mull fo Rule well their own houfes, as may partly prove them not unfit to Rule the Church, mufi Rule them by holy infiructions, and guiding rh.cm as their mouth in the Worihip of God. But thofc mcn!ioncd r 1im. 3· mull fo Rule their houles: Therefore, &c. The Paftors Ruling of theChurch doth moll confill in going before them, and guiding them in Gods Wor01ip, Therefore fo doth the Ruling oftheir own houfes, which is made a trying qualificati– on of their firnefs hereunto. Though yet it reach not fo high, nor to fo many things, and the con– elution be not Affirmative [ He tbJt ruleth his own hou[e weU, is fit torule the Church ofGod; J but Nc– t.ative [He that r~Jleth not his own horlje weU,is mt fit to rule the Church ofGod J; Bur dut is, becau[c J , This is a lower degree ofRuling, which will not prove him fit for a higher: 2 . An-d it is~ Oiit One qualification of many that are requifice. Yet it is apparent that feme degree of aptitude is proved hence; and that from a fimilitude of the things: When Pa~tl compareth Ruling rhe Houfe to Ruling the Church, he cannot be thought to take them to be wholly hctc:rogeneous. He would never have laid, He that cannot Rule an Army, or Regiment, or a City, how !hall he Rule the Church of God~ I conclude therefore that this Text doth lhew that it is the duty of Mallers of families , to R•l• weU their own familitr in the right wor!hipping pf God, mutatis muttzHdir, as Minillcrs mull Rule the Church. Argument Ijl• If familiu bavt JPtcial ntctf!ity offamily-prayer conjun{Jry, wbid> cannot be fupplyul othe'fnli[t ; thtn it iJ Goel1 wiU that foJmily-prayer jhould be in ufe : But fomilits bavtJitch neceffities: Therefore, &c. The Confequent needs no proof ; The Antecedent is proved by inHances. F<~mi/jes have Famil,y neceffities, which are larger than to be confined to a Clo{et, and yet morepfivate than to be brought fiill into the publick Affcmblies of the Church. 1. There are m•ny worldly occafions abont their Callings and Relations, which its fit for them to mention among themfdves, but unfir to menti– tion before all the Congrcg1tion. 2. There are many difiernpcrs in the hcart.s and lives ofthe mem– bers of the families, and many mifcarriages, and differences, and difagreements which mull be taken up at home, and which prayer muft do mw:h lO cure, and yet are not tit ro be brought tp the eirS of the Church-affimblies. 3· And if it were fit to mention them all in publick, yet the number of fuch cafes would be fo great, as would ov~rwhe1m the Minifier, anc;\ confound the publkk Worfhip?, l}ay, one half of them in moll Churches could not be mentioned. 4· And fuch cafes are of ordinary occur– rence, and therefore would ordinarily have aU thefe im:onveniences, And yet there are many fuch cafes that are not fit ro be cgnfinc.~d to our{tcret prayers each otic by himfelf; becaufe r. They often fo fin together, as maketh it fit that they confefs and lament it toge– ther : 2· And fame mercie1 which rhey receive together, its fit they feek.., and give~ thanks for toge– ther: 3· And many works which they do together, its fit they feek a bleiling on together: 4· And the prefcnce of one another in Confeffion, Petition and Thanksgiving doth tend to the increafe of their fervour, and warming of their hearts, and engaging them the more to duty, and againfi fin; and is needful on the grounds laid down before. Nay, it is a kind ofF•mily-fchifm, in fuch cafes to fep, nte from one another, and to pray in fccret only ; as it is Church-fchifin tG fcparate from the Chhrch-af– {i:rnblies, and to pray in families only. Nature and Gr~ce delight in 'Unity, and a~hor divifion; And. the Light of Nature and Grace cngageth us, to do as much of the work of .God in Unity, and Con– 'ord, and CommUnion as we can. Argument 20. If hifor~ tbt giving of the L•w to Mofes, G~d wa1 wo>jhipped in famili<J byhiJ own appouummt, and this appotntment be·~ot yet reverft, thtn God 11 to be JPorjhipf~d in families jiill: Bitt 'lbt Antectdent ir certain : Therefore [o is the conflquent. I think no man denyeth the lir!t part of the Antecedent ; that before the flood in the families of the righteous,and after till the <llablifhment ofa Prie!thood,God was worfhipped in families or houlholds: Ttt 2 k
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=