or Instituted by him â—fore the Promulgation of the Decalogue and â—ver afterward declared to be Typical is a â—oral Duty or else this Assertion may be justly â—cepted against For all Uncommanded Worship â— forbidden and therefore Unlawful Worship â—either can any thing be properly a Moral Duty â— be performed in the Church of God as a Part â— his Worship which hath not the Stamp of Diâ—ne Authority upon it For the Agreeableness of Practice to that which is called Right Reaâ—â—n or the Light of Nature is no sufficient Ground â— a Church Observation except it be also comâ—nded by God I do not in the least Question but â—â— the True Church of God in all Ages was guidâ—â— by his Holy Spirit in the Worship they perâ—â—â—med and he accepted or else I know not how â—â—y could be the True Church or perform acâ—â—ptable Service to him For the True Church hath â—â—d Christ all along for it's Head of Government and Influence to suppose it at any Time to be witâ— out him for it's Legislator and Guide were to maâ—â— it cease it 's very Being For the Being of the Trâ—â— Church consists in it's Union with and special Râ—lation to Christ as it's Head And for the Servicâ— which it performs to God they must be of his Prâ—paring and not the Issues of our own Privaâ—â— Studies and Contrivances Fâ—â— * Reynold's on Hos 14.1 2. nothing can go to God i. â— meet with Acceptance at hâ—â— Hands but what first comâ— from him From whence it doth apparently follow thâ— whatsoever was practised in the True Church of Goâ— and approved by him as a Part of his Worship eveâ— before the Giving the Sinai Law had his Commanâ— for it because it could not otherwise be acceptabâ—â— Worship to him For he accepts of none but whaâ— he has Appointed To this it may perhaps be Objected that befoâ—â— the Giving of the Law at Mount Sinai there waâ— no written Law and so no Command for thâ— Churches Direction in Worship But Moral Dâ—ties of Religion were written in Mens Hearts bâ— Nature and by serious Attention thereunto the could discern what they were without any speciâ—â— Revelation and so perform true and acceptabâ—â— Worship to Almighty God Answ This Objection is in part answered alreadâ— where I have shewn that Moral Duties of Religioâ— are not written in Mens Hearts by Nature bâ—â— by the God of Nature and that serious Attentioâ— alone is Morally Impossible to make the great Diâ—coveries which are attributed to it for Manâ— Natural Condition in the Faâ—â— being as the Holy Scriptures dâ—clare †Acts 26.18 Eph. 5.8 Col. 1.13 1 Thes 5.5 Darkness how is â— possible for him to see his Mâ—ral Duty to God and to perform it with Acceptance without special Revelation for he must needs fail who hath not this Unerring Guide to direct him And tho' there was no written Law before the giving of that at Sinai and so no written Precept for Direction in Church-Worship yet this Defect was supplied by Divine Revelation * Ushers's Body of Divinity p. 6. In the beginning of the World saith one God delivered his Word by Revelation And a little after †Ibid. p. 7. From the Creation until the time of Moses for the space of 2513. years God immediately by his Voice and Prophets sent from him taught the Church his Truth Heb. 1.1 ‖ Taylor 's Ductor Dubit l. 2. c. 1. r. 1. n. 44. p. 180. Another hath this excellent Saying Christ is called by Peter and the Greek Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of the Father and the Law and it is remarkable this Word or Law of the Father was the Instrument of teaching Mankind in all Periods of the World And * See Baxter's More Reasons for the Christian Religion p. 94 95. a Third makes no doubt but the Eternal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word that had undertaken Mans Redemption and thereupon was our Lord Redeemer gave even to Socrates Plato Cicero Seneca Antonine Epictetus Plutarch c. what Light and Mercy they had tho' they understood not well from whom or upon what Grounds they had them Sect. 6. Many Learned Men do tell us of the Seven Precepts which pass'd from one to another by Oral Tradition Six whereof were first given to the Sons of Adam and the Seventh super-added to the Sons of Noah and altogether by the Rabbins stiled the Seven Precepts of the Sons of Noah which the Church of God had before the Sinaical Promulgation and the same in Substance with the Decalogue They are set down in this Order by a great †Hammond's Annot. on Act. 15. d. Critick 1. The First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Strange Worship or of renouncing the Idolatry of the Heathens the not Worshipping other Gods 2. The Second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Benediction that is the Worship of the Name that is the true God 3. The Third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Judgment or Administration of Justice 4. The Fourth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of disclosing Nakedness that is of Abstaining from all Vncleanness and interdicted Marriages within those Degrees which are set down Lev. 18. 5. The Fifth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of shedding of Blood or against Homicides 6. The Sixth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Theft or Rapine and doing as they would be done to by others 7. The Seventh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Member of any living Creature or that they should not cat the Flesh of any Creature with the Blood in it See also Synopsis Critic in Act. 15.20 Schindler in Pentaglot p. 1530. Curcell Rel. Christ Institut lib. 4. c. 11. Sect. 3. Tho' this Discourse may seem a Digression to those who conceive the Church of God was chiefly directed in Matters of Worship by meer Rational Principles before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai yet to others who Believe Divine Revelation was her only Guide it will appear very necessary for the clearing of the Truth to all such as are imposed upon by the Asserters of Natural Worship as tho' that as such were Acceptable to God Unless therefore R. A. be understood according to the Explication before given I think there is sufficient Reason to except against his Consideration which he proceeds to prove thus That singing the Praises of God was thus practised viz. In the Church of God and approved by him before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never afterward declared Typical is evident Exod. 15.1 Then sang Moses and the Children of Israel this Song to the Lord Essay p. 10. Sect. 7. Answ If this Text doth not prove Conjoint Singing with Plurality of External Voices which is the Point he contends for he hath then lost one main Proof of the Morality of it and that this Instance doth not prove it the following Considerations I hope will evince First It is altogether improbable that Moses and the Children of Israel all Sang Vocally
have no intrinsick Goodness in them but derive all their Vertue and Obligation from God's positive Command and Legislature yet I cannot receive his Notion about Moral Duties of Religion Namely That they were originally written in the Heart of Man by Nature and may still in a great measure be discerned by serious Attention and Consideration without any special Revelation Essay p. 7. To discover the Unsoundness of this Assertion Man may be consider'd both in his Innocential and Lapsed Estate and so Nature it self according to this twofold State of Man admits of a double Signification In Man's Estate of Innocence it could not possibly be Nature as the word is commonly taken but the God of Nature who originally wrote the Moral Duties of Religion in the Heart of Man And God said let us make Man in our Image after our Likeness So God created Man in his own Image in the Image of God created he him Gen. 1.26 27. And the Apostle shews wherein this consisted Namely In Knowledge Righteousness and Holiness Col. 3.10 Eph. 4.24 From the comparing of which Scriptures it plainly appears 't was God himself and not Nature that insculp'd them upon the Heart of Man Again Nature in the Fall is totally depraved as well as Man and therefore stands in equal need of Redemption And this being the Case how can that which is universally corrupted exert an Operation peculiar to a most Pure and Holy Principle as is the writing of Moral Duties of Religion upon the Heart of Man I know 't is a received Opinion with many that the Light of Nature doth discover those Moral Duties unto Men which are incumbent on them as Creatures But if they are ask'd what they mean by the Light of Nature we find them divided in their Answers Some tell us it is Natural Conscience but that springing from the Natural Powers of the Reasonable Soul which is defiled in the Fall cannot do the Work assigned it Others say 't is a Relick of that Light which Man lost by his Fall or a Remainder of the Law written in the Heart of Man in his first Creation which is not saith Zanchius wholly * Partim expuncta partim obliterata Zanc. Tom. 4. l. 1. cap. 10. p. 190. erased by the Fall But how can this be seeing †Omnes homines per inobedientiam Adae injusti effecti totique quanti sunt animo corpore corrupti c. Tom. 6. Com. in Eph. p. 82. he and ‖ Baptist's Confes of Faith Chap. 6. Sect. 2 4. Westminster Confes Chap. ibid. others acknowledge that Man by the Fall is dead in Sin and wholly defiled in all the Faculties and Parts of Soul and Body Is utterly indisposed disabled and made opposite to all Good and wholly enclined to all Evil. If Man lost all Spiritual Life Light and Power by the Fall then 't is impossible in that Estate he should have any such Relick or Remainder left in him for the discovery of his Duty to God Against this it is Objected That the Gentiles were not only directed but also enabled by the Light of Nature to do the Duties of the Moral Law For when the Gentiles which have not the Law do by Nature the things contained in the Law these having not the Law are a Law unto themselves Rom. 2.14 The Answer hereunto is obvious if it be considered what Nature the Apostle intends in this place if that Divine and Spiritual Nature which is derived from the Lord Jesus Christ then the Objection vanisheth but if that Corrupt and Depraved Nature we derive from Old Adam then 't is utterly impossible that any by that Nature should do the things contained in the Law whose Commands are Holy Just and Good And therefore Estius and Toletus in Pool's Synopsis Criticorum do understand by Nature that which is per Gratiam reparata repaired or restored by Grace From whence 't is evident whether we consider Man before or after the Fall neither the Law of God it self nor Moral Duties of Religion arising therefrom were written originally in the Heart of Man by Nature but by the God of Nature alone to whom the Inscription is peculiar as being not only a Special Branch of his Royal Prerogative but also of his Gracious Promise to his People I will put my Law in their inward Parts and write it in their Hearts Jer. 31.33 Sect. 2. The Term Moral which R. A. much insists upon being ambiguous would require some Explication but that by applying of it here to the Worship of God and opposing it to meer Positive and Instituted Duties he hath given us his Sense of its signification Only let the Reader take Notice that he seems to comprehend the whole of Religious Duties under these two Heads Moral and Positive and in saying those of the first sort may still in a great measure be discern'd by serious Attention and Consideration without any special Revelation To me he plainly intimates we are not much obliged to Divine Revelation for any thing save those of the second sort viz. meer Positive Duties such as Baptism and the Lords-Supper which have no real intrinsick Value in them but receive as he says all their Force whereby we are obliged to observe them from the Declaration of God's Will and Pleasure by his Word The serious Attention and Consideration he speaks of are surely too dim a Light of themselves to make the great discoveries he ascribes to them For he doth not speak of some particular Duties only that are discernable thereby but Moral Duties Indefinitely and those not darkly neither but in a great Measure and such as do oblige a Christian Now tho' it should be supposed but not granted that some such discoveries may be made as he mentions by serious Attention and Consideration without any special Revelation I would then fain know of him how the Stoicks Platonists and Peripateticks Men destitute I suppose in his Opinion of special Revelation and yet many of them very serious for Attention and Consideration came to be so divided De naturâ summi Boni about the Nature of the chiefest Good some placing it in the Habit others in the Action of Vertue and some in the Union of the Soul with God Whence it came to pass that those great Contemplative Moralists did spend so much of their time in Disputes about the Nature of Vertue in general the Offices of it and the measures of Practice conform thereunto If Attention and Consideration would have directed them in those Enquiries 't is strange how such Studious and Speculative Men should be at so great an Uncertainty about them Again If special Revelation be not necessary to guide Men in their Disquisitions about the Moral Duties of Religion but serious Attention and Consideration exclusive of such Revelation will still in a great Measure direct them I demand the Reason of that universal Ignorance which possesses the Minds of the Wisest Men of all Nations who have
not I conceive in his Judgment special Revelation about these two great Duties of Religion viz. the Worshipping of Christ as God and the Believing that Salvation is to be had through him alone since 't is demonstrable from his Hypothesis who divides Religious Duties into Moral and meerly Positive that neither of these before-mentioned can be meerly positive but must of necessity have something Moral because they have an intrinsick Goodness in them and flow from that relation we have to Christ as Creatures for he is our Creatour no less than our Mediatour For by him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth all things were created by him and for him and he is before all things and by him all things consist Col. 1.16 17. All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made John 1.3 Once more If Moral Duties of Religion may still in a great Measure be discerned by serious Attention and Consideration without any special Revelation then it will follow that the contrary Vices are discernable by the same way For that which directeth Men to the Knowledge and Practice of Vertue directeth them also to the Knowledge and shunning of Vice Now if Moral Evil is still in a great Measure to be discerned by serious Attention and Consideration without any special Revelation then surely it was so in former Ages And if so whence was it that some of those Moralists that had the greatest Reputation for Humane Wisdom were so mistaken about the Nature of Moral Evil Will R. A. say they were not Men of serious Attention and Consideration I suppose he will not What thinks he then of * Dixit omnia peccata esse paria nec minùs delinquere eum qui Gallum gallinaceum cùm opus non fuerit quà m eum qui Patrem suffocaverit Tul. Orat. 23. pro Muraena Zeno who made no difference between one Sin and another but accounted him as great an Offender who kill'd a Cock no necessity requiring it as he that slew his Father If any Credit may be given to Tully who writes his Character in short he was a very great Man And * Justitiae primum munus est ut ne cui quis noceat nisi lacessitus injuria De Offic. l. 1. Tully himself one of the chief of his Age both for Philosophy and Eloquence a Man of profound Study and Speculation expresly allows of Revenge in case of Injury And commends †Nonnunquaem mortem sibi ipsi consciscere alius debet Catoni autem c. moriendum potius quà m Tyranni vultus aspiciendus fuit De Offic. l. 1. Self-murder in some Persons at some times and particularly in M. Cato who chose rather to be his own Executioner than to see the Face of Caesar 'T were easie to multiply ‖ See Taylor 's Ductor Dubit l. 2. c. 1. r. 1. n. 33 46. p. 176 180. Instances of this kind and to shew that some Men of great Attention and Consideration have been so very confused in their thoughts about Moral Good and Evil that they have perverted the distinction of both making that Duty which is Sin to do and that Vice which is a Duty to practice And 't is no wonder these Men of Consideration were at so great a Loss for they expected more from themselves as to these Matters than they did from God The Philosopher saith (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Enchirid cap. 71. Epictetus expects all from himself Our Life saith (b) Deorum immortalium munus est quod vivimus Philosophiae quod bené vivimus Itaque tantò plus nos debere huic quà m Dijs quanto majus beneficium est bona Vita quam Vita Epist 90. Seneca is from God but that which is greater than Life our Vertue is from Philosophy Therefore we owe so much the more to Philosophy than we do to God by how much Vertue is better than Life And (c) Virtutem nemo unquam acceptam Deo retulit Cic. de Nat. Deorum another hath this strange Expression No Man saith he ever thought himself obliged to God for being Vertuous These were Men of great Attention and Consideration but while they scorn'd to acknowledge Moral Vertue Rem beneficiariam a Benefit collated by Heaven but * Illam sibi quisque debet non ab alio petitur Sen. Epist 90. owed it wholly to themselves How was it possible they should ever attain to distinct and certain Notices of Good and Evil or to use R. A's Words discern in a great Measure Moral Duties of Religion For such knowledge is from God which they proudly disowned They did understand many Truths and were eminent for many Parts of Morality but if serious Attention and Consideration were their alone Guide how came the chiefest of them to be so misguided in several important Duties wherein 't is not improbable they used equal Exactness and Care in their Disquisitions For my part I cannot conceive what is intended by this Assertion of R. A. wherein so much is attributed to serious Attention and Consideration unless he would depreciate Divine Revelation and if not set up Theism or Natural Religion in it's Room yet at least place them upon equal Ground or what is very near of kin to Theism raise the long buried Pelagian Notion out of it's Grave Sect. 3. From the Explication of his Thesis viz. That Singing the Praises of God is not a meer Positive Duty but a Moral one and consequently the Duty of all Men thus examined I proceed in the second place to his five Considerations which he brings to prove it 1. His first Consideration is That 't is a moral Duty for Men to praise God with all the Faculties wherewith he has endowed them To †1 Cor. 6.19 20. glorifie him not only with the Faculties of their Souls but also with all the Members of their Bodies Essay p. 8. Answ The Apostle makes it a pure Evangelical Duty and argues not from our Creation but from our Redemption Ye are bought with a price therefore glorifie God in your Body and in your Spirit which are God's 1 Cor. 6.20 I do not deny it to be a Moral Duty to praise God with all the Faculties of Soul and Members of the Body but in the place quoted the Apostle presseth the Corinthians to glorifie God from a pure Evangelical Principle Christ hath given himself a Ransom for Soul and Body and therefore with both ye are obliged to glorifie him And what is this to Singing Yes saith R. A. 'T is certain that Men have not only a Faculty to praise God in their Hearts by an inward acknowledgment of his Goodness and Excellency but also with their Mouths and this not only by Speaking but also by Singing his Praise Answ 'T is certain all Men ought to praise God with all the Faculties of their Souls but 't is not certain that all Men have a Faculty
one was the Practice of the Church as such in those Days and not the other But seeing he refers to speak more fully of this Subject in his last Chapter we shall wave the further Prosecution till he comes thither Only because he says Whatsoever was practised in the Church of God and approved by him before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never afterward declared to be Typical is a Moral Duty I would desire him to tell me where the Praising of God with Musical Instruments used Exod. 15.20 by Miriam and the Women was ever afterwards declared to be Typical Every Type he knows must have it's Antitype and that not such an Idea as we give an Existence to in our own Imaginations but it ought to stand clear upon Record in the Holy Scriptures as in the Case of Circumcision the Paschal Lamb Brazen Serpent Tabernacle Temple Mercy-Seat Levitical Priesthood Altar and Sacrifices or else it is no Type properly Now if the Praising of God by Musical Instruments hath no Antitype declared in the Scriptures as it hath not then it is not Typical but according to his Conclusion it must be Moral and if so then 't is a Duty of equal Obligation with his Vocal Singing and the Omission of it a Sin of Ignorance or Voluntary Neglect This Inference tho' it be the plain Consequence of his Assertion yet I disclaim all Interest in it so as to be any Part of my Opinion In this Assertion he intimates That there are no Duties of a Middle Nature between Moral and Typical but I think there are some Duties incumbent upon us which are not at all Typical and yet somewhat more than meerly Moral He says Moral Duties of Religion were originally written in the Heart of Man by Nature These now are Duties of Religion To love our Enemies to bless them that curse us to do good to them that hate us and pray for them which despitefully use us and persecute us Mat. 5.44 and have nothing at all Typical in them neither are they meerly Moral for no Man findeth them in his Heart by Nature But they are such Duties which have undoubtedly something in them that soars above the Sphere of meer Morality To give him another Instance the Special Graces of the Holy Spirit as Faith Hope and Charity called also Duties tho' they contain Morality in them and are conversant about it yet are they not meerly Moral according to R. A's Sense of the Word or Typical but wholly of Super-natural Extraction Again Because He is so positive that no Exception can be made against this Assertion viz. That whatsoever was practis'd in the Church of God approved of him before the Giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never afterward declared to be Typical is a Moral Duty I demand what he thinks about the Admission of Infants into Church-Membership for that was practis'd in the Church of God and approved by him before the Giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never afterward declared that I read of to be Typical If his Position be unexceptionably true then 't will follow that the Admission of Infants into Church-Memâ—â—rship was a Moral Duty and if so then it ought 〈◊〉 be practic'd now and consequentâ—â— both he and the five * Jos Maisters William Collins Joseph Stennett John Piggott Tho. Harrison Brethren who subscribed two Commendatory â—â—â—faces One to his Essay and Anoâ—â—er to his Vindication and Appendix â—â—ve given away the Cause of Anâ—adobaptism which hath been and is so strenuâ—â—sly contended for and put an Unanswerable Arâ—â—ment into the Hands of those who argue for the â—â—ght of Infants to Water-baptism and Visible â—hurch-Membership in Gospel-days And here I cannot but think it both necessary and â—â—asonable to remark briefly upon â—â—â—s Notion of the †Essay p. 8 14 40. Vniversal â—â—d Immutable Obligation of a Moâ—â— Duty without making any Exception 'till he â—â—mes to page 106. where he tells us of the Old â—â—stinction between the Obligation of Affirmative â—â—d Negative Precepts of the Moral Law In that 〈◊〉 latter not only bind always but also to all times â—â—â—reas the Former tho' they bind always yet not to 〈◊〉 Times But if God can alter the Law of Nature and disanul the Obligation by taking away the Matter of the Law or the Necessity or the Reasonableness or the Obligation and all this he can do â—â—th ‖ Duct Dubit l. 2. c. 1. r. 1. n. 49. p. 181. Jer. Taylor one Way â—or other then the Duty aâ—â—ng from the Law can oblige 〈◊〉 longer than the Law it self obligeth For the â—â—w of Nature hath in several Instances respect to â—â—rticular States and so becomes in those Instances changeable as the States themselves Whereupon the * Casuist before cited Ibid. â—â—ndemns Grotius of an Unwary Expresâ—â—â— in saying that God cannot change the Law of Nature For as Paul said of the Priesthood being chang'd there must of necessity be a change of the Law So it is in the Law of Nature Matter of it being chang'd there must of Neceâ—ty also be a Change of the Law This may seem New and indeed is Unusâ— in the manner of speaking but the Case is Eâ—dent and Empirically certain For when â— commanded Abraham to kill his Son the Israeâ— to rob the Egyptians and to run away with thâ— Goods he gave them a Command to break Instance of the Natural Law and he made necessary that Cain should marry with his Sistâ— and all those Laws of Nature which did sâ—pose Liberty and Indistinction of Possessions â— wholly altered when Dominion and Servituâ— and Propriety came into the World Tayâ— Ibid. n. 48. Of the same Mind is Thoâ— Aquinas who * Sum. Theol. 12 ae q. 94. Art 5. saith Tâ— Law of Nature may be châ—ged two Ways 1. By Adding something to it profitable Humane Life which it did not primarily â—quire 2. By Substracting from it in some particular â—stances whereby the Obligation ceaseth as to thâ— Instances for certain special Reasons impedâ— the Observation Sect. 9. His Fourth Consideration whereby endeavours to prove Singing the Praises of â— a Moral Duty is Whatsoever is enjoyned upon all Men of Nations is a Moral Duty Essay p. 11. Answ This Position being laid down withâ— any Limitation or Exception I deny for thâ— two Reasons 1. Because there are some Duties of Universal â—unction upon Mankind which I have * Chap. 1. Sect. 8. p. 32. shewn before are of a â—ddle Nature between Moral â—d Typical One Instance is about Loving our â—mies Blessing them that curse us c. which are Typical for they have no Antitype nor meer-Positive for they are Intrinsically good Nor â—â—ly meerly Moral for tho' they contain that â—ch is Moral in them yet they are not written Mens Hearts by Nature for Depraved Nature â—holly bent the contrary way Men naturally â—cluding it highly reasonable To repel Force by â—ce and to take Revenge upon their
placed after â—he Destruction of the Amorite when it was long â—efore compare Exod. 12.35 51. with Numb â—1 24 'T is Hierom's Observation upon Amos 2. â—hat In reciting the Praises of God the Order of Hiâ—â—ory is not kept but it often falls out that things first â—â—me are mentioned last and the last first Sect. 3. Now if any shall Object that to admit of these Trajections may be of dangerous Consequence to Religion because the Enemies of the Holy Scriptures may improve them against Christ and Christianity I Answer Trajections are usual in all other Writings and if the Style of the Holy Scriptures be an Objection against them in the Minds of any upon that Account by the same Rule they may reject all other Writings in the World because they have their Trajections as well as the Holy Scriptures But some will be ready to say If the Holy Scriptures are full of Trajections and other sort of Figures how shall we who are Illiterate Persons know them and will not this tend to a Confining oâ— the Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures to Learned Men only and so to an Enslaving of us to theiâ— Dictates and Authority I Reply Humane Learning is singularly useful in Translations and in giving the Grammatical Historical Topographical anâ— Chronological Explications of the Holy Scriptures buâ— 't is Divine Learning alone that instructs to the Kingdom of God and makes a Man wise to Salvation For 't is the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation thaâ— leads into the Saving Knowledge of Christ and thâ— Spiritual Understanding of the Mysteries of thâ— Gospel And therefore if a Man or Woman be ignorant of Humane Learning meer Strangers tâ— Arts and Languages yet if they have Divine Learning are taught and instructed by the Holy Spiriâ— and yield Obedience thereunto they come to knoâ— the Mind of the Lord in the Holy Scriptures anâ— to be sensible Witnesses of the same while otheâ— with all their Humane Literature and Skill iâ— Originals not regarding the Inward Revelatioâ— of the Spirit of God upon their Minds but dâ—pending upon and trusting to their Natural anâ— Acquired Abilities which cannot possibly unfolâ— the Mysteries of the Gospel spiritually unto them are in the dark about the Things of God and wholly void of all Spiritual Sense and Understanding of them These know more indeed of the Outward â—etter which is but as the Cabinet to the Jewel at the other coming to the Spirit and Life are â—ruly made Possessors of the Jewel it self The Holy â—criptures with respect to all saving Spiritual Underâ—tanding thereof are as a Sealed Book till the Lion â—f the Tribe of Judah breaks off the Seals and oâ—ens the Sacred and Spiritual Contents to the Soul And hence it is that so many Learned Doctors â—nd Rabbies have Ears and hear not Eyes and â—e not and Understandings and perceive not â—ecause they consult with Flesh and Blood with â—heir own Carnal Wisdom and Reasonings and â—eject the Counsel of God which he gives in by â—he Spirit of his Son to direct and guide us â—to all Truth But they that wait upon the â—ord in the true Poverty and Humility of their â—wn Spirits and do purely resolve their Faith â—to the Glorious Power of God without any Mixture of the Wisdom of Man these have the â—yes of their Minds opened by the Great and â—ble Illuminator Christ Jesus to see the Works â—f the Lord and his Wonders in the Depths of â—oly Scripture while the meer Letter-Wise cannot â—ith all their Worldly Wisdom discern them â—or the Things of God saith the Apostle knoweth no â—an but the Spirit of God 1 Cor. 2.11 No Man can â—er come Spiritually to know the things of God â—at is the Mysteries of the Gospel but by the Immeâ—ate Revelation of the Spirit of God He hath reâ—â—aled them to us by his Spirit v. 10. Now as they were â—â—rst revealed unto the Apostles by the Spirit so â—â—st they again be revealed unto us tho' we have â—â—em in their Words already by the same Spirit or â—â—ere is no possibility of Knowing and Understanding 〈◊〉 them Spiritually Sect. 4. R. A. 3. Much less is there any Reason to imagine that it was peculiar to the Jewish Passover as a part of it and so of the samâ— Mutable Nature with it Singing to the Praise oâ— God being as I conceive hath been sufficientlâ— proved a Moral Duty and therefore of Unâ—versal and Perpetual Obligation and so fit tâ— be used upon that or any other Joyful Occasion Essay p. 22. Reply 3. He hath not sufficiently proved Singinâ— to the Praise of God to be a Moral Duty as I havâ— shewn in my first Chapter where his Notion oâ— the Moral Duties of Religion as being Originaâ—ly Written in the Heart of Man by Nature anâ— still in a great Measure to be discerned by serâ—ous Attention and Consideration without anâ— Special Revelation and his Five Considerations tâ— prove the Morality of Singing according to thâ— aforesaid Notion are Examined and Disproved and therefore the Singing he contends for is nâ— of Universal and Perpetual Obligation R. A. 4. There is the greatest Reason to coâ—clude that our Lord Sang this Hymn with hâ— Disciples at least especially upon the Occasioâ— of his own Supper and the Commemoration â— his Sufferings and redeeming Love therein foâ— asmuch as it was immediately joyn'd thereto â— the Evangelists plainly shew Essay p. 23. Reply 4. This Answer is coincident with hâ— Second in my Reply whereunto I have shewâ— the frequent use of Trajections in the Holy Scriâ—tures that Immediety of placing a Word or Seâ—tence doth not always prove Immediety of Timâ— Concord or Relation and that there is a greateâ— Probability that this Hymn appertained to the Passâ—ver than to the Lord's-Supper R. A. Nor is there any Force against this Conclusion in that Objection which some make That had this Hymn belonged to the Lord's-Supper doubtless the Apostle would have mention'd it when he * 1 Cor. 11.23 c. sets down the Institution of this Ordinance as he had received it from the Lord. For to this I reply That were there any Force in this Objection we might also thence conclude that Giving of Thanks before the Cup doth not belong to it Of which tho' it be plainly express'd by the †Mat. 26.27 Mark 14.23 Evangelists yet the Apostle makes no Mention His Design being as I conceive not so much to give an Account of all things pertaining to the Lord's Supper as to correct those Gross Abuses which were crept into that Church in the Use of this Holy Ordinance Essay p. 23 24. Rejoinder The Force of the Objection is rather strengthned than weakned by his Reply For tho' the Apostle doth not immediately mention in so many Words that the Lord Jesus Gave Thanks before the Cup as Matthew and Mark do yet they being express'd before he Brake Bread and the Cup said to be taken after the same manner his giving of Thanks before
to praise God by Singing Vocally Whether he understands by Faculty some connate power of the Soul in which sense the Understanding Will and Appetite are Faculties or as the Word in it's true Origination imports Facilitas agendi saith Calep. an Easiness to do a thing For if he takes it in the first Sense then 't is essential to the Soul and ought to be reckoned among the concreated Faculties which none of those who treat of the Soul have done that I have read of If he understands it in the second Acceptation viz. an Easiness to do a thing then common Experience will oppugn him for how few among the vast multitudes of Mortals have attained such a Faculty However he proceeds to this Conclusion whether his Premises will bear it or no That 't is a Moral Duty and suitable to the Dictates of right Reason for Men to praise God by Singing And takes it to be a clear Demonstration Answ Saying and Proving are two things Pythagoras had indeed obtained so great an Authority among his Scholars that his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his bare Assertion pass'd without Contradiction But Implicit Faith hath long since been abandoned by the sincere Disciples of Jesus and nothing short of Evident Proof should be admitted for Demonstration which is here wholly wanting If to praise God by Singing be suitable as he says to the Dictates of right Reason then those who are not of his Opinion in this matter have either wilfully rejected that Guide or are Metamorphosed into Irrational Beings either of which would be too uncharitale to suppose seeing those who dissent from him do believe with the Apostle that Religion is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Reasonable Service Sect. 4. 2. His Second Consideration to prove that Singing the Praises of God is a Moral Duty is this Singing the Praises of God saith R. A. was a Duty perform'd to him by the Heavenly Angels at the Discovery of his Glorious Perfections in the Creation Which I think evidently shews it to be the Duty of reasonable Creatures as such and consequently a Moral Duty Essay p. 9. Answ First It is a Question whether the Heavenly Angels sang vocally or no because where the Scriptures are silent as they are in this matter we may very well Query about it Secondly If that Opinion oâ— the * Camero Praelect Tom. 2. p. 440 441. Schoolmen be true thaâ— Angelical Beings express their Minds to one another Sola Voluntate by the Will â—y then how can they be said to Sing in a Vocal â—anner When Angels have appeared and spake â— Men in assumed Bodies for the Execution of at present Service Almighty God was pleased to â—ploy them in they spake by the Mediation and â—nistry of the Organs of those assumed Bodies But â—gels considered meerly as Spirits have no Instruâ—nts for the sensible and orderly Articulation of â—â—nds which is properly * Note the Speech here spoken of is that which Philosophers term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Speech uttered or pronounced Exâ—nal Speech and consequently â—nnot modulate the Outward â—ice without assumed Bodies â—ause such an Action is proper a Rational Agent acting by â— Ministry of Corporeal Organs Thirdly 'T is not evident to me that an Exâ—ple of the Angels as such is a sufficient Ground â— the Foundation of a Moral Duty to Men. For â— Glorious and High-exalted Station they are in â— the different Administration they and we are â—er make it improbable that they should be â—ule or Standard for our Obedience Jesus Christ â— Head of his Church having not taken upon â— the Nature of Angels but the Seed of Abraham â— any where referred us to them but to himâ— for Direction in all the parts of Duty â—erefore saith Christ †Mat. 4.19 and John 1.43 Follow â— and the Apostle called â—n the Corinthians to be ‖ 1 Cor. 11.1 â—owers of him as he was of Christ â—e Heavenly Angels are Glorious Creatures Miâ—ring Spirits to the Heirs of Salvation and exâ—te the Will of God in Perfection But as exâ—ent Beings as they are 't is not said in the Hoâ— Scriptures Be ye holy for the Angels are holy â— Be ye perfect as the Angels are perfect But * Levit. 11.44 and 1 Pet. 1.16 be ye holy saith the Loâ— for I am holy and †Mat. 5.48 be ye perfeâ— saith Christ even as your Fatâ— which is in Heaven is perfect â— ought all to Pray that the Will of God may â— done in Earth as it is in Heaven But how â— the Angels of whom there is no Evidence nor much as Probability of their Singing Vocally in Hâ—ven be a Rule or Precedent of such a Practice hâ— below This is a dark Region our Souls are now â— and we know but very little of the State and Eâ—ployment of the Heavenly Angels that they â— Glorious Spirits and do continually Adore â— Magnifie God the Holy Scriptures inform us â— that they praise him by Vocal Singing the Sacâ— Records are not only silent but 't is also Wâ— incompetent to Spirits as such who are Incorâ— real Beings and so incapable through the Defecâ— proper external Organs of a Vocal Celebration of Adorable Perfections In a word the Celestial Anâ— are pure Intellectual Substances separated from Matter and therefore cannot be supposed to Sâ— in R. A's Sense that is with the External Voice But he proceeds to prove the Point asserted â— the Reader may see that he has Ground for wâ— he says his Proof is That the Angels did â— praise God by singing he himself testifies Job 7. When the Morning Stars sang together and the â— of God shouted for joy That by the Morning Sâ— here can't be meant the Material Stars in â— Firmament to me seems plain in that they â— at his laying the Foundatâ— of the Earth which * Gen. 1.1 waâ— the first day of the Creatâ— whereas the Material Sâ— were not made till thâ— fourth day †Ver. 19. And therefâ— by the Morning Stars we are to understand â— the best Expositors the Holy Angels called in the following Words The Sons of God as also Chap. 1.6 And they are fitly called Stars in the same sense in which they are elsewhere called * 2 Cor. 11.14 Angels of Light Essay p. 9 10. Answ I do not think notwithstanding the Assurance he speaketh with that by the Morning Stars we are to understand the Holy Angels and â— know all the best Expositors do not conclude with him †Vid. Crit. Sacr. in loc Rabbi Abenezra understands the Planets the Learned Drusius and Grotius Material Stars with whom also accord the LXXII Interpreters who make a plain Distinction between the Morning Stars and the Sons of God â—eading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Stars simply and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Angels or the Sons of God So (a) Synop. Critic Mercer Lyra Menoâ—bius Tirinus Cartwright and sundry other Learned Men do not take the Morning Stars
figuratively but properly (b) Crit. Sacr. ubi supra Drusius explains â—his place by Psal 19.1 The Heavens declare the Glory of God that is says he By their perpetual Motion and curious Structure and so do the Stars sing his Praises there being a parity of Reason in both And whereas our English Version of the Bible reads Sang (c) Bib. sacr Ar. Mont. Hierom a great Master of the Hebrew translates â—t Laudarent Praised and so doth (d) Crit. Sacr. ibid. Grotius Coverdale's Translation Dedicated to Henry 8. and Printed Anno 1535. hath it thus When the Morning-Stars gave me praise And three other Editions Anno 1540. 1585 and 1591. with Cranâ—er's Preface to them render it Whâ—n the morning Stars praised me together And thus to me it appears we are not to understand by the Morning Stars the Holy Angels with R. A. but the Material Stars in the Firmament who Praise their Creatour in their kind i. e. Objectively tho' not Actively But R. A. says The Material Stars in the Firmament can't be here meant in that they sang at God's laying the Foundations of the Earth which was on the first day of the Creation whereas the Material Stars were not made till the fourth day Let us first examine the Text and then try his Argument The Text in Job is best explained by the Context which lies thus in Chapter 31. Job makes a Protestation of his Integrity in sundry Instances and wisheth some Indifferent Person had the Hearing of the Cause between God and himself O that one would hear me behold my Desire is that the Almighty would answer me v. 35. I would declare unto him the number of my steps v. 37. I would give him as Clark paraphraseth upon his Words a just Account of my Life past to see what he can accuse me for Whereupon after Elihu's Discourse which takes up the 32 33 34 35 36 and 37 Chapters from v. 6. of the 32. thâ— Lord is pleased himself to answer Job out of thâ— Whirlwind Chap. 38.1 Who is this that darkneth Counsel by words without knowledge v. 2. that seekâ— to justifie himself and misrepresent the Wisdom and Justice of my Proceedings Gird up now thy Loyns like a man for I will demand of thee and answeâ— thou me v. 3. Where wast thou when I laid the Foundations of the Earth declare if thou hast understanding v. 4. Now mark the Connexion that R. A. make of the Seventh Verse with the Fourth as tho' they respected one and the same Moment of Time which is I conceive a Mistake in him and that which Logicians call Fallacia Compositionis a Fallacy of Composition in connecting and joyning together thosâ— things which are and ought to be divided For the Seventh Verse doth not seem to have relation to the same Time mentioned in the Fourth but to another Therefore the Old Versions of the Bible before taken notice of begin the Seventh Verse with a Repetition of the Question in the Fourth Where wast thou when the Morning Stars c. making two distinct Questions of the two Verses relating to two different Times and the Seventh not to be either a Member or Exegetical of the Fourth Which is also observed by Simon Patrick in his Paraphrase upon the place Where wast thou when the bright Stars first appeared to proclaim my praise with one consent And by Beza in his Exposition of Job Dedicated to Queen Elizabeth sup loc So that the Context runs very smoothly and agreeably to the Scope of the Place thus Where wast thou when I laid the Foundations of the Earth and Where wast thou when the Morning Stars sang together and all the Sons of God â—houted for Joy Now let us come to the Tryal of R. A's Argument and see what Strength it carries The Material Stars saith he in the Firmament can't be here meant but why so because the Stars â—ere expressed Sang at God's laying the Foundations of the Earth which was on the first day of the Creation whereas the Material Stars were not made till the fourth Day Answ 'T is a meer Begging of the Question for deny the Morning Stars which I apprehend to be Material Stars and not the Holy Angels Sang at â—od's laying the Foundations of the Earth which he â—akes for granted and demand of him better Proof â—or the Hebrew Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ranan doth not necessarily â—fer that Signification here Singing not being it's â—rimary and General Sense as R. A. himself confesseth Essay p. 30. The main Stress of his Argument lies upon these three Suppositions which I think are Erroneous 1. That the Morning Stars here mentioned arâ— not the Material Stars in the Firmament but thâ— Holy Angels 2. That the Angels were created on the Firsâ— Day and 3. Sang at the laying the Foundations of the Earth which was then The First not only makes a needless Tautology in the Text but is alsâ— a * Andrew's Sermon on 1 Cor. 11.16 Wringing of the Scriptures â—strain that out of them which 〈◊〉 not in them The Third If Aâ—gels are to be understood by the Sons of God 〈◊〉 confuted by the Text which says The Sons of Gâ— Shouted not Sang and all know Shouting is a diffâ—rent Sound or Noise from that of Vocal Singing As to the Second I desire him to read an Authâ—cited by him p. 79 112. in Favoâ— of Rythmical Singing †Edward's Excell and Perfect of the H. Scriptures Vol. 3. cap. 7. p. 324. Soâ— saith he refer the Creatiâ— of Angels to this first daâ— work by reducing them the word Heaven in the first Verse but thâ— verse is a general Account of the whole Crâ—tion and not of any particular days productioâ— or else by Heaven and Earth there is meant â— first matter or rude Draught of both the fore no such thing can be inferr'd thence Nâ— are we to think that the Angelick Order comprehended under Light as I find some iâ—gine because they read of An Angel of Ligâ—â— 2 Cor. 11.14 for it is material Light only tâ— is the product of the first days work I â—ther think that Moses designed not to inclâ— Angels in any part of that Account which gives of the Creation for he makes it his â—siness to speak of those Works of God which were Visible and Sensible and therefore 't is no wonder that the Angelick Spirits are not mentioned for they come not within the Compass of his Undertaking Sect. 5. The Third Consideration he brings to â—rove Singing the Praises of God to be a Moral â—uty is that Whatsoever was practis'd in the Church of God and approved by him before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never after declared to be Typical is a Moral Duty I know no Exception can be made against this Assertion â—ssay p. 10. Answ I suppose he means whatsoever was â—ractis'd in the Assemblies of the People of God â— a Part of his Worship and approved by â—â—m that is Commanded
together For if we consider the vast Body of Men that came out of Egypt about six hundred Thousand Exod. 12.37 all which for any thing that appears to the contrary were present at this Solemn Gratulation to God for their Miraculous Deliverance from their Enemies nothing is more unlikely than that they should Sing Conjunctly and with Audible Voices For if they all so Sang either 1. They were all Extraordinarily Inspired for the Performance of that Action Or 2. They had Learned to Sing in an Ordinary Way Or 3. They all Sang Naturally But neither of these carry any shew of Probability with them 1. 'T is not reasonable to suppose they were all Extraordinarily Inspired unless we make a Miracle of the whole Action and then that would do R. A. little Service For tho' a Moral Duty may Miraculously be perform'd yet a Miraculous Action is no Safe Ground to build a Moral Duty upon 2. 'T is not probable they had all Learnt to Sinâ— in an Ordinary Way for if so then there muâ—â— have been some Body to Learn from and that eithâ—â— while they were in Egypt or between their coming out thence and immediate Arrival on the othâ—â— side the Red-Sea But neither of these can we be supposed if we consider either the total Silencâ— of Moses about any such Instructers or the afflicteâ— State of that People in Egypâ— who * Exod. 6.5 9. groaned for Anguish of Spâ—rit under the †Exod. 5.6 19. Cruel Tyranny 〈◊〉 Pharaoh and his Task-masters A very unlikely time to learn Artificial Singing in Or their Murmuring at Pihahiroth when they weâ—â— in Fear of being cut off by Phâ—raoh and said unto Moses ‖ Exod. 14.11 Bâ—cause there were no Graves in Egypâ— hast thou taken us away to die in the Wilderness Or the little Time after for Learning it betweeâ— Pihahiroth and the other side the Red-Sea 3. There is as little Probability they should aâ—â— be naturally qualified for Harmonious Vocal Singing For Experience tells us tho' there is a natâ—tural Aptitude in some to it yet others are whollâ— inept thereunto and can never attain to it all theâ—â— Days Secondly Nothing can be gathered certainly froâ— this Text to prove that Moses or the Children 〈◊〉 Israel Sang vocally together at this precise Time as is conceived they did For the Hebrew Wor◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jashir translated Sang iâ— the Perfect Tense is a * Vatab. Grot. in Syn. Crit. Fâ—ture in Hiphil And therefore †Lex Heb. Lat. p. 197. Leusden renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jashirâ— They shall sing in the Future and not in thâ— Perfect Tense as 't is also rendred Psal 65.14 Heb. and 138.5 So that the true Reading according to the Original is Then shall Moâ—â—s Sing and not Then Sang Moses And â—â—uly it puts me at a Stand to consider that the â—â—me Verb and of the same Future should be either â—â—e Future or Preterperfect Tense as Translators â—â—ease For they have here rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jashir â—â—ng and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ashira I will Sing The one in â—â—e Future and the other in the Preterperfect Tense â—â—d yet both Futures in Hiphil But in Answer to this * Crit. Sacr. â—â—me tell us from Abenezra â—â—at the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Az joyn'd with a Verb of â—â—e Future Tense hath in the Arabick Tongue â—peculiar Property Namely to convert it's Sigâ—â—fication into the Preterperfect which the Hebrews â—â—so sometimes observe as in Deut. 4.41 Jos â— 12 To which I reply I see no absolute Necessity of â—â—ceding from the Future Signification in those Plaâ—â—s and besides the last is so rendred by Pagnine have also taken Notice that in other Places where â—â—at Particle is joyned with a Verb of the Future â—ense as Psal 2.5 and 51.21 Heb. the Verb is â—â—anslated in the Future But Thirdly Should the common Reading be allowed Then Sang Moses and the Children of Israel yet 〈◊〉 will not follow that they all Sang Vocally toâ—â—ther any more than that The three Thousand Acts 〈◊〉 42. or The five Thousand Acts 4.24 31. Prayed â—â—cally together 'T is said of the Three Thousand â—â—at They continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine â—â—d Fellowship and in breaking of Bread and in Prayâ—â— and of the other that They lifted up their Voice 〈◊〉 God with one Accord And yet surely there was no â—â—njunction of External Voices in these Solemn Acts â—â—ey did not all Pray Vocally at once but an Unity of â—eart and Spirit in the whole One whereof prayâ—â— Audibly and the Rest kept Silence the while So in this Eucharistical Song of Moses it is most probable that Moses Sang alone with the Outward Voice and the other were silent but joyn'd with him in Spirit and so might as properly be said to Sing with Moses as the vast Multitude of Believers in the Acts are said to Pray together when one Person performed that Office Audibly in the Congregation And I am the more confirmed in this Opinion because there are some things in this Song that seem peculiar to Moses as a Prophet as v. 14 17. and others which I cannot conceive could be truly spoken by every Individual in that Numerous Assembly For there were many Murmurers among them as appears Chap. 14. 10 11 12. and 16. 2 3. Persons of an unbelieving Heart and how incongruous is it then to apply unto such the Personal Experiences and Living Sensible Evidences of so Eminent a Believer as Moses was How could an Unbeliever say The Lord is my Strength and Song and he is become my Salvation he is my God and I will prepare him an Habitation my Fathers God and I will exalt him v. 2. But Sect. 8. R. A. proceeds to obviate an Objection which he foresaw would be made against his Argument drawn from Exod. 15.1 his Words arâ— these Nor will it follow from this Argument as may be objected that praising God bâ— Musical Instruments is also a Moral Duty seeinâ— they are also mentioned in the same Chapter v. 20. For this doth not appear as Singing doeâ— to be the practice of the Church as such Essay p. 10 11. Answ Whether he intends by Singing that thaâ— which is performed by Plurality of External Voices or by one single Voice is a Moral Duty forasmuch a Musical Instruments are coetaneous with Vocal Singing i. e. of the same Date and Original it 〈◊〉 necessary for R. A. to produce a Word of Institution before the Giving of the Law at Mount Sinai to prove Praising of God by Musical Instruments to be a meer Positive Duty which he hath not yet done or it will unavoidably follow that Praising of God by Instrumental Musick is as much a Moral Duty as by Vocal The Reason is obvious for both take Date and Commence together and there is not the least Intimation given at their Commencement that the one is Moral and the other is Ceremonial or that the
hath taken upon him the Office of Censor if he hath Leisure to examine Latin Authors he may * These are his own Words Br. Vindicat. p. 32. Find abundant Matter to exercise his Criticizing Faculty upon And that I may invite †Ibid. p. 26. this Learned Critick to his pretty way of Criticizing I shall here present him with a Few Instances out of some of the chief of them Justitiaene prius mirer belline laborum Virg. Aeneid l. 11. v. 126. Define mollium Tandem querelarum Hor. Car. l. 2. Od. 9. Et quà pauper aquae Daunus agrestium Regnavit populorum Hor. ibid. l. 3. Od. 30. O Tandem placidus favensque Desine irarum Buchan Psal 90. v. 13. Vos O Patricius Sanguis Pers Sat. 1. v. 61. Omnium triumphorum lauream adepte majorem Plin. l. 7. c. 29. Multis sibi quisque imperium petentibus Sallust in Ascham's School-Master p. 66. Where 't is utterly unaccountable that the Nom. Quisque should be put without any Verb among so many Oblique Cases And yet I observe the same things are mark'd for Barbarisms in one Author that pass for Elegancys in Another 'T is no strange thing for a Learned Man to be at a Loss even about a trivial Point of Grammar A Remarkable Instance hereof we have in * Ad Attic. l. 7. Ep. 3. in Ascham ubi supra Cicero himself who at sixty Years of Age wrote to his Friend Atticus to resolve him whether he should write ad Piraeea in Piraea or in Piraeem or Piraeeum sine Praepositione adding that the Resolution of this Question would free him from a great Perplexity his Mind was then under The Insertion of this Defence I hope will offend none No not R. A. himself for as I would not by any means undervalue his Learning tho' it were but of yesterdays Acquiring so his apparent Attempt to diminish the Doctor 's which I conceive is no way inferiour to his shall be my Apology for this Vindication Sect. 11. Having fairly Examined R. A's Explication of this Thesis viz. That Singing the Praises of God is not a meer Positive Duty but a Moral One and consequently the Duty of all Men and also his Five Considerations whereby he endeavours to prove the said Thesis and shewn wherein he hath failed I come now according to my Promise p. 7. to give my Reasons for denying that Singing the praises of God is a Moral Duty i. e. Moral by Nature And therefore the Reader is to be reminded that when I say p. 15. I do not deny it to be a Moral Duty to Praise God with all the Faculties of Soul and Members of the Body That I may not be thought to Interfere with my self I understand there by Moral not that which is written in the Heart of Man by Nature but that Inscription promised Jer. 31.33 My Reasons are summ'd up in the following Arguments Arg. 1. Moral Duties of Religion saith * Essay p. 7. R. A. are written in the Heart of Man by Nature But Singing the Praises of God is not written in the Heart of Man by Nature therefore Singing the Praises of God is not a Moral Duty The Major is his own and the Minor I prove thus If Man's Natural Condition in the Fall is as the Holy Scriptures declare †Acts 26.18 Eph. 5.8 Col. 1.13 1 Thes 5.5 Darkness and he is ‖ Baptists Confes of Faith Chap. 6. Sect. 2 4. dead in Sin and wholly defiled in all the Faculties and Parts of Soul and Body and utterly indisposed disabled and made opposite to all Good and wholly inclined to all Evil Then Singing thâ— Praises of God is not written in the Heart of Man by Nature But Man's Natural Condition in the Fall is as the Holy Scriptures declare Darkness c. thereâ—ore Singing the Praises of God is not written in the Heart of Man by Nature The Sequel of the Major is plain for an â—ct proper to one Spiritually Quickned and Illuâ—inated and Extraordinarily Influenced cannot â—e performed by One Dead Dark and without â—ch Extraordinary Influence Now Singing the â—raises of God considered as a Part of God's own Worship is such an Act and therefore if Man's â—atural Condition in the Fall be such as is before â—escribed Singing the Praises of God is not writâ—en in his Heart by Nature If the Minor be denyed not only the Texts and â—onfession of Faith cited in the Margin but the â—hole Current of Holy Scripture will abundantly â—rove it Arg. 2. That is the Duty saith * Essay p. 9. R. A. of Reasonable Creatures as such and consequently a Moral Duty which the Heavenly Angels perform'd to God at the Discovery of his Glorious Perfections in the Creation But the Heavenly Angels Sang not at the Disâ—very of God's Glorious Perfections in the Creaâ—on Therefore Singing is not the Duty of Reasonable Creaâ—res as such and consequently not a Moral Duty The Substance of the Major is his own and the â—inor is clearly proved Job 38.7 where 't is exâ—esly said The Sons of God or Heavenly Angels â—outed not Sang for Joy But of this see more â—om p. 16 to 23. in Chap. 1. Sect. 4. of this Reply Arg. 3. That is a Moral Duty saith †Essay p. 11. R. A. which is injoin'd upon all Men of all Nations But Singing the Praises of God is not injoin'â— upon all Men of all Nations Therefore Singing the Praises of God is not a Moral Duty The Major is again his own and the Minor iâ— proved by this Argument Whatsoever is morally impossible for all Men 〈◊〉 all Nations is not injoin'd upon all Men of aâ—â— Nations But Singing the Praises of God is morally impossible for all Men of all Nations Therefore Singing the Praises of God is not injoin'd upon all Men of all Nations The Major is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self-evident for Goâ— doth not require Duty where he doth not givâ— Ability To whom he gives from them he expects Performance The Minor I prove thus If all Men of all Nations have not a Faculty tâ— Sing then Singing the Praises of God is morall impossible for all Men of all Nations But all Men of all Nations have not a Facultâ— to Sing Therefore c. I know of no Exception against the Consequenâ—â— of the Major and for the Proof of the Minor refer the Enquirer to p. 15. of this Reply Arg. 4. Whatsoever is rank'd in the same Claâ— with and no more accounted of by God himselâ— than Sacrifices the chief Parts of Ceremoniâ—â— Worship is no Moral Duty But Songs are so rank'd c. Amos 5.22 2â— and therefore are not Moral Duties Arg. 5. Whatsoever is founded upon Prime Reâ—son such as appears so to all Discerning Person is a Moral Duty But Singing the Praises of God is not foundeâ— upon Prime Reason such as appears so to all discerning Persons Therefore Singing the Praises of God is not a Moral Duty The * Taylor
's Duct Dubit l. 2. c. 2. r. 6. n. 67. p. 280. Major I suppose R. A. will not deny and the Minor is evident for Singing the Praises of God doth not appear to many discerning Persons to be founded upon Prime Reason CHAP. II. Contains a Refutation of R. A's Second Way of Proving Singing of Psalms the Duty of every Christian viz. From the Example of Christ with a Reply to his Answer to the First Objection thereunto which affirms that the Word Sung is not in the Original Text. THat which can be proved to be the Duty of all Men must necessarily be the Duty of every Christian and therefore R. A. foreseeeing what Advantage from such â—oof if it could be had would accrue to his â—ause lays the Ground-work of his Essay in the â—orality of Singing which he conceives is so well â—â—ed that no contrary Attempts can shake it Hear â—ow assuredly he speaks in the Close of his first â—â—ction not as One that has newly put on the â—â—arness but obtained the Victory From these Considerations saith he laid together I douâ— not but 't is clear beyond all reasonable Exceâ—tion that singing the Praises of God is no leâ— than a Moral Duty and therefore the Duty â— all Men and consequently of every Christiaâ— But whether there be Cause for such a Triuâ—phant Conclusion I refer to the Arbitrement â— the Impartial and Judicious and shall attend â— further Proof which he fetches from the Exaâ—ple of Christ R. A. begins his Second Section thus I shaâ—â— prove that Singing to the Praise of God is tâ— Duty of every Christian from the Example â— Christ That this was his Practice in Religioâ— Worship is recorded Mat. 26.30 Mar. 14 2â— Essay p. 14. Sect. 1. Answ The Example Christ saith * Dippers Dipt p. 41. Featley or Apostles without a Precept dâ— not necessarily bind the Church â— have but one Great Example †Ductor Dubit l. 2. c. 2. r. 7. n. 33 34 35. p. 292. saiâ— * Taylor Jesus Christ who livâ— in perfect Obedience to his Father â— also give us perfect Instruction how we should do too in our Proportion In whatsoever he gave â— Commandment in that only we are bound to imit him And a little after We are to look upon Châ— as imitable just as his Life was measured by the Laâ— he gave us But R. A. is of another Opinion shall be seen by and by And as to what he saitâ— is recorded Mat. 26.30 Mar. 14.26 to have beâ— the Practice of Christ in Religious Worship shall be spoken to in my Reply to his Answer the two Objections made against his Argument Singing drawn from those Texts R. A. That every Christian is bound follow the Example of Christ none can doubâ— except only in three kinds of Works viz. his Miraculous Ones which he did by a special Exertion of his Divine Power wherein we cann't imitate him Or else those that were peculiar to him as Mediator as to institute Ordinances in his Church to make reconciliation for sin and other such like Works wherein we have neither Ability nor Authority to imitate him Or Thirdly Those which he did only as a Member of the Jewish Church as in being circumcised keeping the Passover c. wherein we ought not to imitate him Essay p. 14 15. Answ Under which of these three Exceptions will he bring Christ's Washing his Disciples feet â—efore his Supper administring of it at Night to â—welve Men only and no Women and after anoâ—her Meal I suppose he will grant that some of these if not all were practiced by Christ in Religious Worship and if they were none of his Miraculous Works nor Part of his Mediatory Office nor of those Acts which he did only as a Member of the Jewish Church then according to R. A. they are in Force now For in all other Cases saith he I suppose 't is and must be universally granted that the Example of our Saviour hath the Force of a Precept to every Christian Essay p. 15. And if they are in Force now there is nothing if he be faithful to his own Rule can acquit him of Sin in neglecting the Observation of them unless his Et caetera will relieve him in this Case which I conceive will fail him For some of the Instances before given viz. Christ's administration of the Supper at Night and to twelve Men only and no Women and after another Meal were Parts of the New Celebration and not of the Old Paschal Solemnity Wherefore I think he hath miss'd it in saying In all other Cases but the three Exceptions it must be universally granted that the Example of our Saviour hath the Force of a Precept to every Christian For here are some Examples of Christ among others which fall not under either of thosâ— Exceptions and yet do not as I think Bind everâ— Christian Let this then be received as a standing Rulâ— by all Christians That not the Example alone but thâ— Command of Christ accompanying his Example is that onlâ— which obligeth the Saints to Imitation and Obedience R. A. And that our Saviour's Singing Hymn with his Disciples comes under either oâ— those three forementioned Exceptions I can seâ— no Reason to imagine And therefore thencâ— conclude that 't is the Duty of every Christian according to his Example to sing to the Praiâ— of God Answ But what falls not within the Sphere oâ— his Imagination ought not to be the Rule of anâ—ther Man's Thoughts or a Bar to his Liberty For Thoughts are free especially in Problemâ—tical Points which are as Augustine saith Quaestâ—onum non Fidei Matters of Controversie and not 〈◊〉 Faith and some Men think truer and more regâ—larly than others He seems by his Sudden anâ— Peremptory Conclusion to be methinks somâ— what Opinionative and Dogmatical for he cannoâ— but know by the Acquaintance he seems to havâ— with Authours that many Learned Men are 〈◊〉 Opinion that the Hymn sung by our Saviour 〈◊〉 he did Sing at all which is hereafter to be enquâ—red into did peculiarly belong to the Jewish Paâ—sover And therefore in a Disputable Case anâ— where the Hinge of the Controversie mainly turâ— upon the Signification of a Greek Word as doth here the Modesty 〈◊〉 * Ep. 7.28.157 Retract l. 1. c. 1. de Gen. ad Lit. 10. de Anima Augustine's Hesitation toucâ—ing the Original of the Souâ— whether by Creation or Traducâ—â—on who would not concluâ— either way had been more Eligible and Imitable than a Positive Determination which too often occurs throughout the whole Essay Having made his Conclusion from Christ's Example as he saith that 't is the Duty of every Christian to Sing to the Praise of God tho' 't is not certain from the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hymnesantes they Hymned that either Christ himself Sang alone or with his Disciples or if he did Sing an Hymn is it evident from the Context whether it belonged to the Jewish
not â—e Reformation it self as 't is called cry aloud for a Reformation especially the Major part But divers of our Brethren saith he are 〈◊〉 a different Perswasion And 't is hoped they wâ— be enabled by the Grace of God so to continue 〈◊〉 cause your Perswasion about singing after the Coâ—mon Popular Way doth not appear by any thiâ— yet that I have seen written in Favour of it 〈◊〉 have the least Foundation in Scripture Introduc So far as I can apprehend the Noâ—ons of our Brethren they themselves are of dâ—ferent Judgments about this Practice Animadv What Cause then have we to Prâ— that God would be pleased to send forth his Lâ— and his Truth that we may all come to the Knoâ—ledge of his Will Have no 〈◊〉 visions among us but be * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word that signifieth the restoring of things out of order into their proper places again perfâ—ly joyned together in the same mâ— and in the same judgment 1 〈◊〉 1.10 and that all those wâ— are so much for Humane â—cency and Order in the Worship of God may the Vanity of such Attempts and return to Câ—â— the Apostle and High Priest of our Profession 〈◊〉 to his own Appointments as they are in their Naâ— Simplicity and Beauty without the adventitâ— Garnish of Man Introduc Some seem to think that singing 〈◊〉 a part of the Worship peculiar to the Jâ— Church and that therefore 't is abolished uâ— the New Testament Others seem to allow of sâ—ing still but suppose it to consist only in Joyfulâ— of Heart and that it should not be Vocal Agâ— others seem to allow of Vocal Singing but â—ny the warrantableness of Conjoint Singing 〈◊〉 many Voices together Some Scruples arise aâ— the Matter and others about the Manner of Singing Animadv The whole Controversie is reducibâ— tâ—ese two Heads viz. The Matter and Manner of â—â—nging and therefore the Enumeration of the â—â—her particular Differences is unnecessarily preâ—â—sed But seeing they are mentioned as the seâ—â—al Opinions of Brethren about Singing I canâ—â—t omit the Misrepresentation given of the two forâ—â—r of them For they who think that Conjoint â—â—ging with many Voices together was a part of â—â—e Worship peculiar to the Jewish Church do â—â—t think that all Singing is abolished under the â—â—w Testament tho' 't is their Opinion that uniâ— Vocal Singing is Nor do I know of any who â— so for silent Singing as to allow of none that is â—cal That Vocal Singing which I conceive they â—cept against is by a Set-form of Words either of â—e Single Voice or with Plurality of Voices and â—une taught and learned by Art Introduc That therefore I may in some measure 〈◊〉 possible convince the Opposers of this our Praâ—tice satisfie those that are doubting confirm â—hose that are wavering and defend it from the â—eavy Charge which some bring against it of â—eing a groundless and superstitious Innovation 〈◊〉 shall endeavour to clear these five things 1. That singing the Praises of God is a Chriâ—tian Duty and not peculiar to the Jewish Church 2. What singing is That 't is properly an Actiâ—n of the Voice and not of the Heart only 3. That Conjoint Singing of many Voices together is warrantable â— What we are to sing 5. How we are to sing And under each of these I shall endeavour to â—emove all the Scruples of our Brethren that dissent â—rom us so far as they come to my Mind Animadv How well this Author hath acquitted â—self in the Task he hath undertaken will be â— in the Examination of his Book my Design is to follow him according to his own Methoâ— and to weigh all that he offers as Argumentatiâ— for his Opinion in the Ballance of the Sanctuarâ— Whereby the Impartial Reader may judge whethâ— or no the Truth lies on his side the Scale or ouâ— He tells us in the Introduction That he can truâ— appeal to God that 't is only a sincere love to Truâ— hath prevailed upon him at this time to off his thoughts about this Matter and he heartiâ— desires that herein he may be guided by the Woâ— and Spirit of God pag. 2 3. And in the Epistle Dedicatory he acquaints tâ— Members of that Church of Christ to which he â— most immediately related That he lays befoâ— them what he judges to be the Counsel of Gâ— in this Matter and as to the Fundamental Proâ— of Conjoint Singing with many Voices togetheâ— which he calls a Religious Practice and whereâ— he expects the acquiescence of their Judgmenâ— and Consciences he therein depends only upâ— the Authority of God's Word and Sound Argâ—ments deduced from thence And I have so muâ— Charity to hope that he is sincere in his Appeâ— and writes what he apprehends to be true Bâ— as he acknowledges in the beginning of his Intâ—duction That the best here know but in paâ— and that different Sentiments even in Religioâ— Concerns are every where found among soâ— of the wisest and most serious Christians Paâ— 1. So I the less wonder that he himself shouâ— in this Controversie pursue a Shadow instead of tâ— Substance and wander in a dark and crooked Patâ— who had a clear and strait one to walk in Bâ— thus it hath fallen out thro' a Mistake of the Poiâ— he hath endeavoured to manage and the Opiniâ— by him defended hath proved a strengthning of â— Opposers and still lies under the heavy Chargeâ— being a groundless and superstitious Innovation CHAP. I. Wherein R. A's first way of proving Singing of Psalms a Christian Duty viz. From it's Morality is considered and disproved Richard Allen having laid down this Position viz. That singing the Praises of God is a Christian Duty and that it was not peculiar to the Jewish Dispensation endeavours to prove it these three ways 1. From it's being a Moral Duty 2. From the Example of our Lord Jesus herein 3. From the Apostolical Injunctions thereof I shall consider his several ways of Proof in their Place and Order and in this Chapter begin with his first viz. The Morality of singing of Psalms He and others who are for common popular Singing lay great stress upon the Morality of their Practice I have often heard it urg'd as their Achildean Argument For when they have been beaten from other Holds they have run to this as their impregnable Fort. Therefore let us attend to what R. A. says about the Moral Nature of it and the immutable Obligation wherewith it binds all Mankind to the performance thereof Singing the Praises of God saith he Essay p. 6. is not a meer Positive Duty but a Moral One and consequently the Duty of all Men. This I deny and shall give my Reasons for it when I have examined 1. His Explication of this Thesis And 2. His five Considerations to prove it Sect. 1. First I shall examine his Explication of this Thesis wherein tho' he hath spoken well concerning the Nature of meer positive Duties as being such as