all, concerned in them, unite their humble and fervent requests for the merciful communication. Nations warrantably hope for national blessings, when they join in public supplications to God. The same observation is equally applicable to all inferior societies among mankind. The members of a household are here the persons interested; the persons who hope to receive; and, therefore, the persons who should ask. They are unitedly to receive: their supplications, therefore, ought to be united. Nor is there any case, in which a gracious answer to prayer may more justly be expected. Among the Disadvantages, which flow from the neglect of family prayer, may be mentioned its unhappy Influence.

1. On Domestic Order.

The mind naturally opposes order; and cannot be brought to observe, or relish it, unless by influence long exerted, arguments often repeated, and habits slowly and firmly established. Where these advantages do not exist in some good degree, man more resembles a wild beast, than a rational being; is impatient of all regularity, and all restraint; and is precluded, alike, from all worth, usefulness, and enjoyment. But no means contribute so easily, so powerfully, or so happily, to the establishment of good order in the house, as family worship. I do not deny, that this benefit flows in various degrees, from other sources. But even

these are prevented of no small part of their influence, where this species of prayer is neglected. They are pillars, standing on one side of the building; and incapable of supporting it, because those on the other side are taken away.

2. On Parental Government.

By this neglect, all the advantages, already mentioned with reference to this subject, are lost; and all the disadvantages, derived from the opposite conduct, are incurred. An irreligious parent cannot fail to be seen by children in an unhappy light. Nor is this any fault in them. The most dutiful children will regard him in this manner. Irreligion is in its nature odious, and contemptible; and cannot, unless under the influence of strong habitual prejudice, fail to be seen as it is. The conscience of every child will tell him this truth; however affectionate, and reverential, may be his disposition.

But the parent who is thus viewed by his children, and who gives them reason to view him thus, will find his instructions, reproofs, and punishments, stripped of their principal efficacy. This efficacy is chiefly dependent on the reverence, with which he is regarded: and this reverence, in a higher degree than he will probably be aware, is inseparably dependent on their apprehension, that he is a religious man. But the omission of family worship will necessarily attach to his character, always in some degree, and usually not in a small one, the appearance of irreligion. Even in the most amiable, and in other repects unblameable, men, it will vent that full conviction, in the minds of children, of parental re

pre

spectability, which it is so desirable, that they should entertain. Even this fact will have a considerable, and malignant, influence upon the government, and obedience, of children."

3. On the Religion of a family.

In a family, where such worship does not exist, there is, it must be acknowledged, no appearance of religion. If the parent, a case which rarely happens, should be a religious man; he is not seen to possess this character. Should he appear to sustain it in some things; he is plainly discerned not to sustain it in others; and thus exhibits an inconsistent, vibratory course of life, on which the eye cannot rest with either conviction, or pleasure. Such a contradictory character can have little influence in doing good to the minds of children. Whatever desirable efficacy it may possess, when viewed on one side; it will impair, and destroy, when seen on the other.

pass

All professions of Religion, all pretensions to being religious, for nothing in the minds even of children, when unsupported by a religious life. But, in the present case, the children behold their parent live in the continual neglect of what their consciences naturally declare to be one of the first duties of religion. Hence, whatever regard he may testify to this sacred subject; how numerous, and how solemn soever his instructions to them may be ; his power of making useful impressions on their minds, will in a great measure be prevented. Let it be remembered, that this prevention will be voluntary and wanton. No necessity can be pleaded for it; no advantage alleged; and no excuse found. How solemnly ought parents, who thus causelessly strip themselves, and rob their families, of these inestimable benefits, to ponder this unhappy course, and to give themselves neither rest, nor peace, until they shall have begun a final reformation!

The Objections, which, within my knowledge, have been alleged against Family prayer, or rather which have been intended to excuse the neglect of this duty, are chiefly the following.

1. The want of an Express injunction of it in the Scriptures. There is not, I acknowledge, any passage in the Word of God, which, in so many terms, enjoins prayer in a family as a duty, in distinction from other modes of religious worship. Of him who thinks this fact an objection to the performance of this duty, I ask, Will you neglect every Christian duty, which you do not find enjoined in express terms? Are you prepared to go through life without dedicating your children to God in Baptism? Will you refuse to observe the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath? Do you feel authorized to exclude the female sex from communion at the table of Christ? Yet in vain would you look for precepts, enjoining these things in express terms.

But I deny the inference, drawn by the objector from the silence of the Scriptures concerning this subject. Not only is the general principle, that nothing is our duty, which is not expressly requir

ed in the Scriptures, false; but the application of it, also, even if it were allowed to be true, is, in the present case, incapable of being justified. As the objection itself seems to be generally relied on more than any other; it will be useful to consider the subject of it, at length, as it is exhibited in the Scriptures.

Prayer is no where in the Scriptures enjoined as a duty, which was before unknown, and new, at the time of the injunction; or as then to be begun. On the contrary, it is always spoken of as a duty, already known, confessed, and practised. All the commands concerning it, respect either the times, manner, degree, spirit, universality, or some other circumstance, with which the performance ought to be connected. In no instance is the duty enjoined as original; or as the subject of a new institution.

The first mention made of this subject in the Scriptures, if we adopt the common translation, is in Gen. iv. 26. Here, after the birth of Enos, it is said, that then began men to call on the name of the Lord; that is, mankind then began publicly to worship God in a solemn, religious assembly. I suppose, however, that this translation is erroneous; and believe the words ought to be rendered, then began men to be called after the name of the Lord: that is, the family of Seth began to be called the Sons of God; in opposition to the apostate family of Cain, who were styled the children of Men. See Gen. vi. 2.

According to this opinion, the first passage, in which prayer is mentioned, is the prayer of Abraham for Ishmael. Gen. xvii. 13. The second is his intercession for Sodom. Gen. xviii. 24. The third is the direction that Abraham should pray for Abimelech, after his offence in taking away Sarah. This may be considered as a command.

The fourth is the declaration, that Isaac went out into the field to pray in the evening. Gen. xxiv. 63.

To these may be subjoined, as next in order of time, several instances in the book of Job.

Yea, thou restrainest prayer before God. Job xv. 4.

My prayer is pure. Job xvi. 17.

What profit shall we have, if we pray to him? Words of the wicked. Job xvi. 15.

He shall pray to God, and he will be favourable to him. Job

xxxiii. 26.

A command. Job xlii. 8.

My servant Job shall pray for you: The first passage, which can be fairly construed as an injunction of prayer in the general sense, is the exhortation of the Psalmist, Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: that is, the Church at large. Ps.

cxxii. 6.

The second is in Jer. xxix. 7: Seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for it.

In all these passages, (the whole number of those, in which the subject is mentioned, until after the period of the last, which has been quoted) there are four instances in which prayer may be said to be commanded. In the two first, individuals are required to pray for individuals, on single and peculiar occasions. In the third, Saints are commanded, or rather exhorted, when assembled for public worship, to pray for the peace of the Church. In the fourth, prayer is enjoined upon the Jewish captives, for the peace of the city, whither they were to be carried. All the other passages are merely circumstantial accounts of the subject.

The first injunction of this duty, the terms of which regard it as in any sense generally obligatory, were given when the world was about three thousand years old; and the Jewish Church about eight hundred. The second, about two hundred years afterwards.

From these facts I conclude, that it was not the intention of the Scriptures to institute this duty, anew, in any passage whatever : there being no passage in which it is thus instituted. They took up this subject in the only way which was natural, or proper. Men had always prayed from the beginning; and on all occasions confessed prayer to be a duty. Nothing more, therefore, was necessary, natural, or proper, than to regulate it as a duty already begun, acknowledged, and practised by mankind. The state of facts demanded only that the Scriptures should teach the manner, the times, the spirit, the constancy, and the universality, of prayer. Nothing more was necessary and this is done in the happiest, and most effectual, manner conceivable.

From this account of the manner, in which prayer is treated in the Scriptures, it appears evident, at least to me, that original, and particular, directions concerning the three divisions of this duty, customarily made in modern times, viz. secret, family, and public prayer, ought never to have been expected. The circumstances, in which the subject is taken up, and the manner in which it is exhibited, forbid every expectation of this nature. The question, whether prayer in secret, in the family, or in public, is a duty of man, was probably never asked, nor the obligation to perform it in either case doubted, during the whole period, from the beginning of the world to the completion of the Scriptural Canon. Men always prayed on every solemn and proper occasion; in public, in private, and in secret. When one man had wants of his own, which he wished to spread before God; or blessings, which he wished to ask; he performed this duty in secret. When two, twenty, a hundred, or a thousand, had common wants, and wished for common blessings; they united in their devotions; and thus formed a greater, or smaller religious assembly. Thus families, thus Churches, and thus nations, met together for social prayer and praise, as well as for the purpose of offering social sacrifices.

To this origin are to be referred the family sacrifices of Elkanah and Jesse; and, among the heathen nations, the existence of household gods, and domestic libations. Such gods, derived from the same source, were in all probability the Teraphim, which Rachel took from Laban. Abraham's family plainly worshipped together: so did the family of Job: so did Christ and his Apostles: so did the Apostles after his ascension. There were little religious assemblies, also, in the houses of Aquila, and of Nymphas; consisting, probably, of their own households, and of such others as were Occasionally present. The whole congregation of Israel, also, assembled at the times, specified in the law of Moses, from the days of that lawgiver to the latest period of their national existence. În the same manner, worshipped the Christian Churches at Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, and other places.

The truth unquestionably is; prayer was instituted by divine appointment from the creation of man; and was traditionarily spread through all nations, as a duty, evident to common sense, and acknowledged by the universal voice of mankind. The Gentiles practised it in every form, as did the Patriarchs, Jews, and Christians. It was performed by one, few, or many that is, by all, who were interested in the wants felt, and the blessings supplicated; and secretly, privately, or publicly, just as the occasion required.

On this scheme is the text formed: Pray always with all prayer: that is, pray on every proper occasion, with prayer, suited to that occasion if the occasion be your own, with the prayer suited to it; viz. secret prayer: if your own and that of others also, be they few or many; with prayer suited to every such occasion.

:

Families are always together at least twice every day; and every day furnishes at least two occasions to all the members for communion in prayer. All the members, therefore, are required by this precept unitedly to spread their common wants before their Maker, and to ask for blessings in which they have a common interest.

In the same manner, are both secret and public prayer enjoined. Neither of these duties is enjoined originally. All the precepts, relating to them, are employed in regulating the disposition with which, the manner in which, the times at which, they are to be performed; or the modification, or other circumstances pertaining to the performance. Neither of these duties is any where in the Scriptures instituted anew; but both are always spoken of as already existing.

At the same time, several passages of Scripture, beside those already mentioned, refer to this subject, in a manner too evident to leave a reasonable doubt, that family worship was their immediate object. When Joshua informs the children of Israel, that as for him and his house, they will serve the Lord; he teaches us directly, that they united, and had customarily united, in this service. The