# WCF - The Directory for Family-Worship



## ChristopherPaul (Aug 7, 2006)

Questions regarding The Directory for Family-Worship



> THE General Assembly, after mature deliberation, doth approve the following Rules and Directions for cherishing piety, and preventing division and schism; *and doth appoint ministers and ruling elders in each congregation to take special care that these Directions be observed and followed*; as likewise, that presbyteries and provincial synods enquire and make trial whether the said Directions be duly observed in their bounds; and to reprove or censure (according to the quality of the offence), such as shall be found to be reprovable or censurable therein. And, to the end that these directions may not be rendered ineffectual and unprofitable among some, through the usual neglect of the very substance of the duty of Family-worship, *the Assembly doth further require and appoint ministers and ruling elders to make diligent search and enquiry, in the congregations committed to their charge respectively, whether there be among them any family or families which use to neglect this necessary duty; and if any such family be found, the head of the family is to be first adminished privately to amend his fault; and, in case of his continuing therein, he is to be gravely and sadly reproved by the session; after which reproof, if he be found still to neglect Family-worship, let him be, for his obstinacy in such an offence, suspended and debarred from the Lord's supper, as being justly esteemed unworthy to communicate therein, till he amend*.





> IV. The head of the family is to take care that none of the family withdraw himself from any part of family-worship: and, seeing the ordinary performance of all the parts of family-worship belongeth properly to the head of the family, *the minister is to stir up such as are lazy, and train up such as are weak, to a fitness to these exercises; it being always free to persons of quality to entertain one approved by the presbytery for performing family-exercise.* And in other families, where the head of the family is unfit, that another, constantly residing in the family, approved by the minister and session, may be employed in that service, wherein the minister and session are to be countable to the presbytery. And if a minister, by divine Providence, be brought to any family, it is requisite that at no time he convene a part of the family for worship, secluding the rest, except in singular cases especially concerning these parties, which (in Christian prudence) need not, or ought not, to be imparted to others.



Are ministers and ruling elders still expected "to take special care that these Directions be observed and followed" per the above directory?

Do elders still "stir up" the lazy and "train up" the weak when it comes to the head of the family and his duty to lead his family in family-worship?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 7, 2006)

The Directory of Family Worship is not constitutionally binding on most American Presbyterian churches, including the PCA. It was a product of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland and that historical context has influenced which denominations today regard it as authoritative and which view it as merely good advice, if it is considered at all. In my denomination, the PRC, the duty of our elders to oversee their flock and promote family worship, in terms of training, encouragement, accountability and even discipline, is taken very seriously, although the DFW is not constitutionally binding.

There is another thread on elder visitations which has some relevance to this question, including some PCA and OPC statements dealing with the duties of elders vis-a-vis family worship. Also see WCF 21.6; PCA BCO 63.3; RPCNA Directory for Worship 1.2, 5.2, 6.1; OPC Q&A on Family Worship.

[Edited on 8-7-2006 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Aug 7, 2006)

If elders take care of the souls of their flock, I don't see how they would want to neglect what the directory is explaining.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Aug 7, 2006)

> _Originally posted by C. Matthew McMahon_
> If elders take care of the souls of their flock, I don't see how they would want to neglect what the directory is explaining.





I agree and would LOVE for my church to train and and stir up the heads housholds. I too often feel I am all alone in training myself to understand and apply scripture.

I will mention this to my elders and see what reaction I get.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 7, 2006)

> _Originally posted by C. Matthew McMahon_
> If elders take care of the souls of their flock, I don't see how they would want to neglect what the directory is explaining.



I concur. Sadly, however, family worship is not a priority or even on the radar screen for many even "conservative" Protestant churches today. Hence, there is little to no teaching or exercise of church discipline in this regard, particularly among churches that have not adopted the Directory for Family Worship.

Joel Beeke says:



> In many churches and homes family worship is an optional thing, or at most a superficial exercise such as a brief table grace before meals.



[Edited on 8-7-2006 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Aug 7, 2006)

This is enforced in my church (part of the RPCNA).


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Aug 9, 2006)

The Directory for Family-Worship is constitutionally binding in the PRC and RPCNA. Any other denominations? How about the URC or RPCGA?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 9, 2006)

> _Originally posted by ChristopherPaul_
> The Directory for Family-Worship is constitutionally binding in the PRC and RPCNA. Any other denominations? How about the URC or RPCGA?



Just to clarify about the PRC and RPCNA -- 

1) the 1647 Directory of Family Worship is not constitutionally binding in the PRC although the 1645 Directory of Public Worship is; 

2) the RPCNA has a 1945 Directory of Worship which is constitutionally binding and has much to say about family worship, but the 1647 Directory of Family Worship is not constitutionally binding in the RPCNA.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Aug 9, 2006)

Ok, thanks!




> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by ChristopherPaul_
> ...


----------

