of those of Abrahams seed which degenerated and slighted the Covenant of the Gospel and these were properly the carnal seed Suitable to this is that distinction of Abraham being a natural and a spiritual Father For First He was a natural Father to these to whom he was a spiritual Father as to Isaac and Jacob and the godly of their posterity Secondly All to whom he was a natural Father were under the Covenant and had the seal until they rejected themselves the promise took in both relations as to outward administration Rom. 3.1 2 3 4. And if men truly state things you may argue as much against Abrahams natural seed from enjoying these priviledges as believers natural seed now and with as much evidence of truth But let us weigh these Scriptures which are brought by our Opposites First consider that of Rom. 9.6 7 8. They are not all Israel that are of Israel neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all Children but in Isaac shall thy seed be called that is they which are the Children of the flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of promise are accounted for the seed The Apostle in this Chapter doth with a bleeding heart begin the sad story of the Jews rejection from being a Church and speaks as one loth to mention it and therefore brings it in with a passionate and hearty Apology v. 1 2 3. he was in heaviness he could wish himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accursed from Christ for his brethren his Kinsmen according to the flesh that is for these that we call Jews according to the flesh Q. But what needed all this trouble to have a carnal generation of men cut of why doth Paul Paul take on so heavily Sol. In the 4 and 5 v. he tels you Who are Israelites to whom pertains the adoption of glory and the Covenant and the giving of the Law and the service of God and the promises whose are the Fathers of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came Here is a Catalogue of high priviledges which belonged to the Jews which they were to be cut off from which lay on Pauls heart and was like to sink him Ob. Well might some say v. 6. then the promise of God is in vain if they be rejected unto whom the adoption and the promises belong Sol. The Apostle anticipates that Objection Not as though the Word of God hath taken no effect no the promise is the same and immutable but they are not all Israel which are of Israel neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all Children c. This is the very natural coherence of these words let us now use our judgements to distinguish and review the place and we shall find it a weapon whose edge is turned against these that count it their own 1. The Apostle is sadly troubled for his kinsmen after the flesh for their rejection his reason is because of the Covenant and the promises made to them because they were the natural seed of Abraham which holds forth that the promises and the priviledges of the Covenant were made indefinitely to all the Israelites 2. That it 's a most sad thing to be excluded from the outward and general administration of the Covenant Why should Paul thus break out in his affections for the loss of outward priviledges if it were not such a mercy to be under them 3. The Apostle holds forth that persons may be under the outward administrations of the Covenant and yet not get the efficacy of it v. 6. They are not all Israel that are of Israel the Covenant was made with Abraham and his seed all that were of him and yet all were not Israel that is partakers of the inward life and efficacy of the Covenant the Apostle only in these verses endeavours to take off that Objection that God had broke his Covenant by casting away the Jews and so distinguisheth of these that were meerly of his flesh who had the outward administration but not the inward fruit and these which were elect in the promise In Isaac shall thy seed be called the rest he cals the Children of the flesh the former the Children of promise v. 8. and so though they were under the outward dispensation of the Covenant yet God was not mutable nor his promise though he rejected them because of their own degeneration so that the sum of this place is 1. That the Covenant was made in general with Abrahams seed to all that came from him 2. That in the administration of general and indefinite promises there is a secret distinction and a vein of election carried through the administration that takes hold of some not of others 3. That none are the Children of promise real Saints but those that have the true effects of the Covenant in their hearts 4. That all Children of Believers though the promise visibly belong to them as to Abraham and his seed yet may not follow their Parents faith and so not be Israel though of Israel But here is nothing at all to demonstrate that Infants because Children of the flesh are not under the promise but rather the contrary for in Isaac shall thy seed be called saith God now he was a Child of Abrahams flesh as well as these which were cast off and yet a Child of promise so God makes his Covenant indefinitely with believers and their seed and yet the efficacy of the Covenant may reach but some an Isaac or a Jacob an elect vessel and yet the other under the outward administration until they manifest the contrary But more of this from that Acts 2.38 39. I come now to that other place so much urged by them Gal. 3.16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made he saith not to seeds as of many but of one which is Christ Now by Christ here cannot be meant barely Christ personal for then no believer should be accounted for the seed but only Christ it must be meant of Christ mystically or Politically considered as the visible Head of the Church if to Christ mysticall then to all the Elect as in him and so to Infants as well as grown persons who make up that mystical body but thus the promise is conveyed under ground as it were none knows the veins of it thus in the Old Testament flesh and flesh came from Abraham the Covenant administred to them both by its seal yet one flesh enjoying the spiritual blessings the other rejected Take the promise to be made to Christ the seed as the Head of a visible Church then still it speaks for us for Infants of believers were never cast out of the visible Church they were once in and the promise is made now to them with their Parents as shall be hereafter proved at large but if we look no further back then the 14th v. of this Chapter we shall receive some light to this It 's said in the 13th v. Christ hath
it is our duty to sing them CHAP. III. An Answer to that Objection concerning singing by a gift not set Psalmes ONe speciall Objection that is made against singing Scripture Psalmes c. is that it hinders the exercise of gifts and so it s but formall all dutyes in the Church must be done from a gift Answer 1. You see here is a duty laid on us no such limitation as from a gift 2. The matter is prescribed you Psalmes and Hymnes and Songs and to these you are especially enjoyned now the limitation of the matter limits the duty 3. There is no promise of such a gift in the Gospel to compose Psalmes and Hymnes God hath provided matter sufficient there is a promise for the spirit of prayer and supplication Zach. 12. and of preaching and prophesying in Joel repeated in Acts 2. but no distinct promise for a gift of spirituall Poetry or Singing for there are but three things required to singing fit matter a voice and heart all which may be performed without any such speciall gift of composing the matter is ready if the heart and voice be present 4. It is a duty laid generally on the whole Church without any distinction of gifts all are commanded to sing c. Here is no hint of a gift required 5. Christ would not ordaine an Ordinance of such consequence which the Churches should want the use of some utterly and not one among many should know what it meanes for there is hardly one among a thousand of Saints which hath such a gift of composing Psalmes and Hymnes c. and if it be an Ordinance in one Church all others may want it and so be deprived of the comfort of such a sweet Ordinance for want of a pretended gift when they have matter enough of praises before them 6. It is lawfull to make use of the gifts of others as well as to use our owne when a man hath a gift of prayer I joyn with him and make use of his gifts c. So is it much more lawfull to make use of the gifts of holy and blessed men in Scripture who had that glorious gift of composing all sorts of Psalmes Hymnes and spirituall Songs and when we sing them with melody in our hearts we manifest all those treasures of the gifts of the spirit that breathed in these Psalmes c. as if we had from a personall gift composed them our selves for if we sing them with the same understanding with the same inward affection of love joy c. wee sing them with the same spirit 7. If there were such a gift promised it would have beene mentioned by Christ or his Apostles as the gift of tongues and miracles were and Saints would have been instructed to seeke for it and these that had it would have beene commanded to wait on it as the Elders are on exhortation teaching ruling the Deacons on administring and distributing c. Rom. 12.6 7 8 9 10. 8. It is Antichristian to introduce an Ordinance to be practised among the Churches which hath not been commanded by Christ and his Apostles these that differ make much use of the word Antichristian and cannot but grant this principle to be undeniable now I assume but to introduce A way of singing by a gift with casting off Scripture Psalmes and Hymnes and Songs was never commanded by Christ or his Apostles ergo it is Antichristian the minor hath beene proved before there is no mention in the writings of Christ or the Apostles of singing Psalms by a personall gift or of a gift of composing Psalmes either for our selves or the Church neither is there mention of any other Psalmes Hymnes and Songs as the matter to be sung but such as are pen'd in Scripture and left to be sung by all the Churches Thus if men will being in a new Ordinance they must shew their authority from the Word or else apply the word Antichristian to themselves For that expression in 1 Corinth 14.26 When you come together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every one hath a Psalme hath a Doctrine c. from whence they gather they had a gift of composing Psalmes by the Spirit which they were to sing in the Church if they did it orderly To which I further answer there is not any thing to explaine what Psalme this was 2. We have more reason to think it was one of these Scripture Psalmes which the New Testament alwaies calls a Psalm as he saith in the second Psalme and in another Psalme as before far more reason then they have to say it was a Psalme of their owne composing by a gift every one hath a Psalme that is this and the other have a Psalme that is one had this Psalm in Scripture which he thought most proper another another of these Psalms for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to be taken universally of all but singularly one hath this another that thus some but rather the meaning is not as if one had this Psalme and another another but one hath a Psalme another a Doctrine another to speake with tongues another to prophesie now thus there was a confusion among them one would have a Psalme sung another would have his Doctrine or word of Construction as most fit another his Revelation Now the Apostle onely tells them they might all be done one by one and in order he that had a Psalme to be sung might in its proper place but this doth not prove that it was a Psalme extemporarily composed or by a personall gift or that it was not one of the Psalmes in that which the Scripture calls the Booke of the Psalmes Object If any say further It must needs be from a gift because it is joyned with other acts which were meerely from a gift as Doctrine Tongues Revelations Prophecy Interpretation I Answer Of these things here named some are accounted extraordinary and peculiar as gifts of Tongues Revelations fitted for these times the other ordinary as Doctrine Interpretation Prophesie though some thinke this last extraordinary also so having a Psalme may be accounted ordinary and not from an extraordinary gift as the gift of tongues was however you must not make a particular argument from things of divers considerations and uses 2. Other Scriptures have determined what a Psalm is and it may be easily gathered what it is in the Corinthians for one to have a Psalme we prove they had a Psalme let them prove what that Psalme was besides these Scripture Psalmes onely mentioned in the New Testament It is most evident that the matter of singing is determined by the words of the Apostle in Colos 3.16 Let the word of God dwell richly in you c. which in Eph. 5. is more in generall Be filled with the Spirit which doe not make any difference for the Word and the Spirit must make up the melody in our hearts but still the word of God is the matter to be sung with the Spirit as it
of Abraham But 2. If they take the promise of the Spirit in a limited and restrictive sense for the external gifts as the most do for the gifts of tongues and miracles and prophesy they both clip the promise and make the argument and comfort from it invalid and of no efficacy 1. It 's a mighty wrong to that famous promise of the Spirit to circumscribe it in these accidental gifts which were especially necessary and almost only for that season when it 's a promise that reacheth all the latter daies and is still accomplishing though all these extraordinary gifts are ceased 2. This straitned sense is expunged by the manner of the expressions of that Prophesy both in Joel and this in the Acts I will pour out of my spirit on all flesh and on your servants and handmaids will I pour out of my spirit Which shews the universality and variety of the subjects and blessings in this promise that it shall be so large and full a mercy as if there were to be no limitation of its measure 3. If it were meant meerly of these gifts why then there is no more benefit of that promise after the Apostles daies but that Christ was out of date and did expire with that age whereas it is a promise made for all the time of the New Testament which is exprest by the latter daies and the last daies up and down the Scripture A parallel promise to this you have in Isa 44.3 I will pour water on him that is thirsty and floods on the dry ground I will pour my spirit on thy seed and my blessing on thy off-spring Now the promise of the spirit is alwaies appropriated to the New Testament daies And secondly This cannot be the meaning of this phrase if we consider to whom the Apostle speaks to persons pricked in their hearts wounded for their sins in crucifying of Iesus Christ crying out v. 37. Men and Brethren what shall we do to be saved Now what comfort could this be to tell them they should have extraordinary gifts their hearts were bleeding under sin their eye was on salvation they saw no hopes of it nor knew the way to obtain it the Apostle bids them repent and be baptized they might have said What shall we be the better why saith the Apostle You shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost for the promise is unto you What promise of gifts of tongues and miracles What is this to our souls how will this save us might they well object It would be but a poor comfort to a wounded soul for to tell him of a promise of gifts not of spiritual grace and the holy Ghost is a better Physician then to apply such a raw improper plaister to a wounded heart which would hardly heal the skin this promise is brought in as a cordial to keep them from fainting and to give them spirits to believe and lay hold on Jesus Christ And truly no other promise but that of free grace in order to salvation can be imagined to give them comfort in that condition But to put all out of question That the promise prophesied of in Joel and quoted here was the promise of salvation and the same with the Covenant of Grace Consult the Original in Joel and the parallel in this of the Acts in Joel 2.27 the Prophet founds all the promises that went before and all that come after on this That he is the Lord their God and none else which was the very express words in that Covenant made with Abraham And then afterwards viz. in the New Testament to make out this fully He will pour out his spirit on all flesh c. v. 32. which is a part of that prophesy and is quoted again in v. 21. Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved one grace put for all and salvation being put at the end of the promise must needs be the aim of it The same expression you have again repeated Rom. 10.13 And in the former v. 38. he exhorts them to repent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the remission of sin the exhortation is to a Gospel duty the effect and profit of it was to be remission of sins and receiving the gift of the holy Ghost and the promise must needs be answerable by which all is enforced and it must needs have been a mighty low and disproportionable way of perswasion to put them upon such high things in the former verse and to encourage them only by the narration of a promise of some temporary gifts in the following when their eye and heart was set on remission of sins and salvation by Jesus Christ and nothing but a promise holding forth these mercies could have been considerable to them And it 's very observable in that verse he joyns remission of sins with the gift of the holy Ghost and then adds the promise to both as the ground of one and the other and comprehending both And for that expression of Receiving the gift of the holy Ghost it may well be noted that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gifts of the holy spirit noting the very sending of the spirit as a free gift to bestow all mercies on them and so respecting rather the free and bounteous manner of bestowing the holy Ghost on them then any limited effects of his reception By all which it is demonstrated that this is no ordinary common no temporal promise or of meer gifts though never so extraordinary but a promise of free grace I only adde this to all the rest as undeniable by the principles of these that differ it 's a promise made not only to these Jews but it 's universally to the Gentiles and to all the called of God but all that are called have not received such gifts of the holy Ghost which then were given but every one that is effectually called doth receive the promise of remission of sins and the free favour of God and therefore this promise must be taken mainly in that sense But the great difficulty is in the following part of the verse and about the interest of their Children in this promise and therefore the next work must be to make out this that the Children as well as the Parents are included in this promise as they were in the promise made with Abraham 1. Let us consider to whom the Apostle speaks to the Jews who were prickt in their hearts The promise is to you and your Children He speaks to them after the wonted manner of expression in the Old Testament when ever the promise is mentioned and useth their own language in which they were trained up in from their Fathers I will be the God of thee and thy seed Gen. 17. The promise is to you and your Children If the Apostle had intended to exclude their Children from the same priviledges they had formerly by the Covenant he would never have spoken
was newly administred Now new institutions as before require grown persons and actual visible believers to be the first subject of them they could not baptize their Children first for then the Parents would be neglected and the bringing in of a new Ordinance requires renewing of special acts in these which partake first of it as if an old Lease which is made in the name of a man and his Children be at such a season to be renewed upon some certain terms the man himself must come and acknowledge his owning these terms and then it is to him and his as before So now in the New Testament God renews the Covenant of Abraham adds a new initiating seal to it it was before entail'd in such a line which is cut off it 's now of the same nature only every one must come in his own person first as Abraham and enter his own name and then the promise is to him and his seed Thus it was in the former place where when the Jews came to be baptized they were exhorted first to repent and be baptized themselves then the promise is to you and your Children So that this we affirm 1. That no man must be baptized or receive an Ordinance by any fleshly prerogative but where there is an entail of a promise there is a spiritual ground of administration 2. That no person grown up to years of understanding hath right to a sealing Ordinance but upon his own personal qualifications 3. That persons may have present capacities and visible right to Ordinances and yet afterwards cut off themselves and be found incapable as Ishmael and here the Pharisees and Sadduces 4. That the exception of some persons upon the account of their degeneration and personal defects doth not hinder but the old priviledges of the promise may be conveyed to these which do really embrace the Gospel and to their seed all these are undeniable in themselves And this Text reacheth no further then to the exclusion of these which had demonstrated themselves to be only the Children of the flesh and not of the promise also which is a demonstration only à posteriori from their after actings and teacheth us that these that boast in outward priviledges without looking after personal qualifications and holy frames within may be as well judged carnal as Heathens and prophane persons CHAP. VII That special place in 1 Cor. 7.14 opened and argued Else were your Children unclean but now they are holy THIS place of Scripture though it seems to stand by it self yet hath full correspondence and harmony with all other places in the N. T. concerning this truth As the former did hold forth the promise the Covenant to Believers and their Children in distinction from all the world so doth this leave a character of special qualifications sutable to a subject of such an Ordinance and when the promise and the qualification shall meet together there is enough for to capacitate to any Ordinance The Apostle is in this verse answering a scruple which might arise in the hearts of the Corinthians concerning abiding together of married persons the one being a Convert and a Believer the other whether man or woman an Unbeliever as it was a common case in the Apostles times the Husband might be converted the Wife not and the Wife converted and not the Husband the Word working on the one not on the other this begat a doubt in the believing Party whether he or she might with a good conscience live together in that state The Apostle answers it ver 12 13. positively That they ought not to separate or leave each other notwithstanding that the one was an Unbeliever And he gives in this ver 14. a strong and peculiar argument which he makes instar omnium for the unbelieving Husband is sanctified in the believing Wife c. Else were your Children unclean but now they are holy The scope of the Apostle here is to hold forth some special Gospel-priviledge annexed to the state and he frames his argument by no ordinary medium of the lawfulness of the marriage according to a natural moral or positive rule but à majori from an eminent advantage they had together in the Gospel For 1. The unbelieving Husband is sanctified in or to or by the Wife 2. The Children in such a state are holy as if they had been both believers That the Apostle holds out a Gospel-priviledge not common to meer unbelievers in their marriage state is clear 1. Because the Apostle puts the advantage on the believers side and there fixeth it the unbelieving Husband is sanctified in the Wife as believing and so contrarily the unbelieving Wife in the Husband So Beza affirms that in two special Copies he finds the words thus read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither can it hold sense with the former words but as thus read And if it had not been the Apostles proper meaning to shew the special priviledge the believing party hath notwithstanding the unbeliever he would have only said the Husband is sanctified to the Wife and the Wife to the Husband that would have been the plainest and least ambiguous expression of such a sentence and the Apostle would never have made an argument of four terms when three could only satisfie for all know that an argument with four terms is most deceitful and false 2. The Apostle doth use higher terms and phrases in this argument then is ever used in Scripture to express a meer lawfull or common priviledge as to be sanctified in the Wife and the Children to be holy expressions of another dialect then to hold forth a civil or natural or legal conjunction being singled out in Scripture to hold forth the best state of persons and things in relation to God and his use And the Apostle useth two terms both negative and affirmative they are not unclean but holy the opening of the use of which two words will clear the point under consideration The word here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unclean in the Old Testament is commonly used for those legal pollutions and uncleannesses which made men to be separated from the Congregation and excommunicated from the priviledge of Ordinances until they were washed and sanctified Thus in Levit. 5.2 3 4. Chap. 7.19 14.7 8. Isa 52.1 Hag. 2.13 with many other places where unclean is opposed to a present sutable capacity for Church-priviledges But that famous place in Acts 10.14 shews it most clear what the proper use of this word is he joyns it there with what is common or prophane When the vision came to him of eating all sorts of Creatures he saith Not so Lord for I have not eaten any thing that is common or unclean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This vision was about his going to Cornelius to open the Gospel to him and bring him into the Church who was a Gentile and so common and unclean not fit for Gospel-priviledges as the Jews were thought to be Now in a civil
when we look on Mat. 19.13 They brought them to Christ to lay his hands on them and pray over them 3. If we consider why the Disciples should forbid them and rebuked these that brought them surely it could not be out of any cruelty to Infants or that the Disciples had no bowels to Infants or desire they might not be happy with their Parents their affections could not be so straitned and bound up in unnaturalness but it must be from some such principle which these of the contrary judgement take up That they were not capable and were first to be taught That only grown men and Professors of faith were fit for Ordinances and therefore they rebuked or chid them and forbad them to do so any more As if they had said What have we to do with Children as to outward Ordinances they are not capable they cannot profess their faith and we must have persons able to hold forth the Gospel which must be visible subjects of Christs Kingdome Doubtless some such grounds they must needs go on or else they must shew a strange kind of passion against Children most unbecoming these which had but the rags of natural affection left in them 4. See Christs affections to them and the reason of it When Christ saw it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was much displeased It 's a word that is used to express such a kind of sorrow as breaks the heart also to stomach any thing and to have the spirit raised in contempt of an unworthy action or person Thus Christ was grieved at them and he looked with contempt on his Disciples as dealing most unworthily with poor Infants in forbidding them to be brought to Christ and therefore he commands them to suffer them to bring Infants to him and not to forbid them These two words shews how vehement Christ was and how much his heart was set towards Infants You find sometimes that Christ gave some sharp words to his Disciples and to Peter especially but never to have his spirit to rise in indignation against them as when they would forbid Infants to be brought to him and that which makes Christ so earnest must needs be of great weight he was never so moved when they all forsook him and Peter did forswear him as when they denied Infants to come to him I could wish that these which with so much contempt and scurrilous language forbid Infants to be baptized might read this place with observant spirits and at least grow more sober and less violent in their expressions concerning poor Infants doubtless it 's a warning to all Christs Disciples Now the reason which Jesus Christ gives is Of such is the Kingdome of God The reason shews what the priviledge was they would exclude Infants from viz. being visibly judged to belong to the Kingdome of God and Christ saith Of such is the Kingdome of God Now take the Kingdome of God either for Heaven and Glory or secondly by way of allusion for the Church and the state of the Gospel it will serve as a full reason Of such that is of Infants is Gods Kingdome made up as well as of grown men and they are as fit subjects as you are But doubtless he especially means by the Kingdome of God as well the Kingdome of Grace in a visible Church as the Kingdome of Glory because else this could be no reason to convince the Disciples of their errour for they were against the visible bringing Infants to Christ for to get some outward sign of favour to them and Christ tels them they may be as well brought to Christ and receive a visible sign as grown persons for the Kingdom of God is made of such as of others 1. Christ shews their interest in one of the highest priviledges The Kingdome of God and that visibly 2. He speaks it de praesenti not only respecting their future estate what they may be but that even now the Kingdome of God is of such 3. He useth this as a common instructive principle for the future never to forbid not only these but such like Infants to be brought to him For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of such is the Kingdome of God Christ would have them take it as a constant principle That wherever they found such like Infants they should not reject them but look on them with Gospel respect Ob. These that differ have nothing to say to this but That Christ means it of such as Children for humility and meekness and lowliness and therefore in the following verse he saith He that shall not receive the Kingdome of God as a little Child shall not enter therein Sol. It 's true Christ takes an occasion to exhort them to humility and meekness from the pattern of these little ones But 1. Christ shews Infants right to the Kingdome of God as well as the Disciples and grown persons who can profess their own faith 2. If Christ had meant only to make an example and resemblance he might have taken Sheep and Doves more properly for they are more meek and gentle then Children who are commonly froward and peevish 3. This crosseth the end of Christs reason which was That Infants should not be hindred from being brought to Christ For of such is the Kingdome of God Now if he had meant of such as were only like them in some qualities not of themselves there was nothing at all in Christs reason And thus must the words be rendred on that account Suffer Infants to come to me and do not forbid them for not of them but of humble persons that resemble them is the Kingdome of God Men will rather make Christ speak non-sense then lose their opinions 4. Can we think Christ could be so displeased with his Disciples for hindring little ones to be brought to him meetly to shew them as resemblances and patterns to grown men and adde this reason For of such is the Kingdome of God when he had examples more fit to that purpose even among the meer sensible Creatures No Christ shews the priviledge of such Infants and checks his Disciples pride who would have none but themselves and grown persons to be esteemed as having any visibie interest in the Kingdome of God Lastly Let us view Christs carriage and actions to these Infants he did not onely shew them as examples but took them up in his arms laid his hands on them and blessed them all expressions of the most signal love and favour and of great import if duly considered 1. He took them up in his arms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word signifies to embrace with special affections so the French Translation Embrasser Piscator embrachiare amplexabunde gesto Bud. Christ took them up in his arms and held them forth as Monuments of his love and doubtless to shew his Disciples that he would have some outward sign and character of peculiar respect set on them by his Church and Saints Such a carriage was not out of a
natural affection only to these that could not pity themselves but from a heavenly strain of love which he bore to these little ones as to the highest professing Disciple and must needs be symbolical to his Churches to take heed how they reject them wholly from any visibie right to the Kingdome of God Christ was to leave the world shortly but he leaves it as a rule to his Disciples 2. Christ laies his hands on them which was used among the Jews as a form of special blessing and in the N. T. for eminent ends 1. For to cure all sorts of diseases by a miraculous power Luk. 4.40 2. For consecration of any to a Divine work and service thus Church Officers were solemnly separated to Christs work as peculiarly fit for it Acts 6.6 Acts 13.3 1 Tim. 4.15 and 5.22 2 Tim. 1.6 3. It was used for confirmation after Baptism and as an outward way whereby the holy Ghost was conveyed and this is the most common use of it in the Acts of the Apostles Acts 8.17 18 19 and 19.6 where those that were baptized had the Apostles hands laid on them and they received the holy Ghost And to this purpose may we apply Christs act to these Infants to confirm the promise solemnly after Baptism For 1. It was ever used except to sick persons after Baptism 2. As it presupposeth Baptism to precede so it 's an outward sign of a special significancy and holds forth as much as if Christ had baptized them for in that outward rite the holy Ghost was conveyed and by laying on of hands others received the holy Ghost as the former Scriptures express and why not in this act of Christ on them Take all the circumstances together and you cannot imagine it to be a complemental act And if this were as an outward sign of their receiving the holy Ghost What should hinder water that Infants should not be baptized seeing they have received the holy Ghost as well as we Acts 10. 47. Christ laid his hands on them Benedictas scilicet manus in quas à Patre suo acceperát omnia bona Coeli Terrae saith a learned Divine on this place He laid those blessed hands on them in which he had received from the Father all good things in Heaven and Earth This act shews 1. That Christ would have some outward visible sign of favour set on such Infants by Churches And Imposition of Hands being one of the choyfest Christ useth that as most proper to shew his Authority 2. That holds forth That if they be capable of imposition of hands they are of an Ordinance of like nature which especially looks at a subject purely passive Ob. If it be Objected Why did not Christ baptize them as well as lay his hands on them if he meant to hint out their right to Baptism Sol. It 's easily answered That Christ baptized none at all but he did that which was an Ordinance usually in those Primitive times administred after Baptism and equal to it as to its dignity and so far above Baptism as it was more extraordinary in its practice And so we may argue from this to Baptism either inclusively or à majori from the greater and I have more from this place to confirm me that if Christ baptized any he would these Infants seeing he shews so much respect to them more then to an grown person and did to them those acts which were equivalent if not supereminent to them then any can have against it Let any that differ from us shew anywhere in the Gospel where Christ laid his hands on any but desperate diseased persons to shew his power or on Infants to shew his love and confirm their antient priviledges or upon any person in this latter sense unbaptized Ob. 2. If it be said This was an extraordinary act of Christ and no ordinary pattern may be drawn from it Sol. I answer Grant it to be extraordinary yet it argues more strongly if Christ used an extraordinary act to shew his affection and love to Infants much more may the Church shew ordinary acts to them 2. Christ shewed this extraordinary carriage the more to check and convince his Disciples for their extraordinary contempt of poor Infants who would not allow them an ordinary interest in visible priviledges And it 's considerable that Imposition of Hands was not an usual Ordinance or administred by any but Christ before the ascension of Christ and the sending of the holy Ghost 3. Though Christs act should be extraordinary in regard of the imitation of that act by us yet he grounds it on an ordinary rule and principle For of such is the Kingdom of God which he laies down as a fundamental rule And this is the least that can be gathered from it That if Christ on this ground set an extraordinary sign on Infants because the Kingdom of God did visibly belong to them we may on the same principle set an ordinary initiating sign on them as visible members of that glorious state as well as on grown visible Professors who are but probable members according to the most judicious charity especially if we will think Christs judgement in such cases equal with our own But lest all this should be thought but a meer outward act of Christs that carried nothing of any inward design of grace he blessed them after all as the fullest expression of his heart and to demonstrate that whatever grace he had should be theirs as others for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies either to speak well of or to any concerning persons or things and thus Christ may be thought to speak much of the state and priviledges of these Infants or else to bless them by desiring for them or communicating to them all sorts of mercies as blessings according to that Eph. 1.3 And what can be more then for Christ to take up Infants in his arms lay his hands on them as an outward sign to consecrate them to himself and to shew their capacity of receiving the holy Ghost and then to bless them which comprehends the communication of all graces and good things And yet we must with scorn poor probable Disciples our selves deny them a little water and think it too much to have them named among the lowest sort of visible Saints when Christ owne them publickly and saith that of such at these is the Kingdom of God and they may have more interest in that Kingdom then these that exclude them but I shall rather believe Christs testimony then any mans froward opinion It 's only a wonder how Saints that have felt Christs bowels themselves and read this Text can be so rigid to Infants of Believers to whom Christ hath been so kind and exemplary in his carriages and stampt such visible characters of his love on even in administration of outward signs To what end should Christ do all this in such a high and peremptory strain of affection if it were not to teach
there is no proportion between a knife and water and therefore it must be in their proper signification and reall use which is the Apostles scope in this place and therefore he expresseth the inward grace properly signified by the one Ordinance and yet confirmed by the other Circumcised in him being buried with him in Baptism 2. If the analogy be between Circumcision and Christs burial not between it and Baptism yet it will come all to one yea be our advantage For 1. That shews that Circumcision did hold forth as much as Baptism viz. Christs death and burial 2. That when we are said to be buried with Christ in Baptism and that is the outward sign to represent our burial with Christ we are as if we were circumcised Circumcision holds analogy with Christs burial and so doth Baptism with both And thus take it in what sense you will the Text will clear it self CHAP. XIV A clear Explication of Mat. 28.19 with Mar. 16.15 16. wherein their argument from the first institution is opened and confuted LET us at length come to view that prime Text Math. 28.19 on which these that are against Infant-baptism lay the most weight As from the very first institution of that Ordinance Christ gives his Apostles there Commission to teach and baptize Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father Son and holy Ghost Hence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they translate Disciple all Nations and then baptize them they argue None are to be baptized by Christs institution but these which are first taught and so made Disciples But Infants are not capable to be taught or to be made Disciples Ergo They may not be baptized That I may shew the errors of this argument and so fully clear up the point the terms with their connexion both in the major and minor proposition must be examined from the words of the Text and that parallel place Mar. 16.15 16. which for methods sake I shall hold forth in these following considerations 1. For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we shall not much stand on whether it be translated to make Disciples or as it is in our common version Go teach all Nations for it is sometimes a verb transitive to teach by writing or viva voce with a living voyce and so it is to be taken here saith learned Whitaker De Script and most agreeable with Mar. 16.15 where he bids them Go preach the Gospel to every Creature 2. The strength of the argument lies if there be any strength in it on the absolute supposed connexion between discipling and being baptized therefore they say None but these which are capable of teaching are capable of Baptism which is Fallacia à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter a Fallacy to take that absolutely which is meant only according to some respect But to shew the idleness of the connexion 1. You find preaching or teaching the Gospel to be separated as to the administration and necessary and immediate connexion by Paul himself 1 Cor. 1.17 Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel so he saith in the former verses He taught many baptized few 2. Compare this with Mar. 16.15 16. which expounds this you will find believing and being baptized as close connected to salvation as here Baptizing to Teach He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved Now if any will stand on the order of words to prove an institution we may as well argue from Mark as they from Mathew None must be baptized but these which are taught so none that believeth and is not baptized can be saved and that Baptism is as necessary to salvation as believing for in order of phrase they are absolutely joyned together And what a strange inference would that be to make Baptism equal with faith to salvation and yet we have as much ground to argue from the one place so as they from the other without they will admit some other qualifying term to make it up 3. The order of things is not always or commonly so exactly exprest in Scripture by the position of the words for sometimes one thing in the order of words is put before another which in order of nature and consideration is antecedent to it as Mar. 1.15 Repentance is put before Faith Rom. 10.9 Confession with the mouth is put before believing with the heart as to salvation with abundance of other places of Scripture Thus many things in the Evangelists are left out by one supplied by another and the same word directly uttered in one inverted in another especially about the administration of the Lords Supper For to avoyd tediousness consult the places your selves Mat. 26.26 27. Mar. 14.22 23. Luk. 22.20 1 Cor. 11.25 3. A third consideration to open this Text in Matthew is from comparing it once more with its parallel Mar. 16.15 there it is Go preach the Gospel here it is Teach and baptize Now hence it follows that their teaching was by holding forth the Gospel As much as if he had said Open the Covenant tell men the riches and fulness of grace Now if they must teach the Gospel they must needs instruct them in the Covenant which was to these that believed and their seed Now sutable to this Commission Peter when he comes to open the Gospel to the Jews pricked in their hearts presently holds out the promise to them and their Children Acts 2.38 39. and by that to make them both Disciples So Gal. 3.13 The blessings of Abraham to come on the Gentiles is one of the main parts of the Gospel Now if they teach men Gospel they must preach as Peter did when he had converted the Parent The promise is to you and to your Children Thus in Luk. 1.72 this is made one great end of Christs coming to perform the mercy promised to our Fathers and to remember his holy Covenant so that preaching the Gospel is preaching the Covenant Now that Infants are in the Covenant as well as grown persons we have formerly proved 4. This is no more then was required of Abraham at the time of Circumcision and yet his Infants were not excluded from the Ordinance Gen. 17. Walk before me and be perfect Chap. 18.19 Abraham was to command his Children and teach them to keep the ways of the Lord and yet his Children were not to be kept from the sign of the Covenant until they were taught and had walked before God in uprightness as Abraham 5. To come home to the word in their own sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Make Disciples now Children are not capable of being made Disciples say they I answer 1. Some have been made Disciples before they were distinctly taught as the twelve whom Christ called and they followed him and became his Disciples and were real Disciples yet as ignorant as Infants and were taught afterwards by degrees 2. One is said to be made a Disciple even
of Jesus Christ as High-priest as any one that runs may read now either they must say these were not baptized before or else must conclude that his design is not to inform them and that so transiently of the nature or manner of administring of that Ordinance Thirdly the Apostle here doth directly instruct the soul how to make confident addresses to God viz. from the sense of our justification and sanctification together for so by our hearts being sprinkled from an evil conscience is meant and can be meant no other then Christs blood sprinkled on our souls in the assurance of our absolution from sin and the washing with pure water no more but by this outward expression of the purity of our conventions as to sanctification that we may not come with scandal of external unholiness when we pretend to be justified by Christs blood Fourthly the usual word is here left out which expresseth that Ordinance and it is your bodies not baptized but washed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a clear allusion to that of Levit 16.4 from whence it seems to be excerpted when Aaron the high-Priest was to enter into the holy place and before he was to be attired for that work it is said He shall wash his flesh in water and so put them on the 70. translate the words thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He shall wash his whole bodie with water to signifie the holiness he should have in his person as from external publick pollutions the very same intent of the Apostle is here that if we would be confident before God when we approach unto God we must come with Christs blood on our consciences and no known pollution on out conversations and if we will follow their grounds from comparing these two places we may conclude that baptism was as much an Ordinance of the Old Testament as the New for washing the body was used in both Fifthly it is a usual phrase in Scripture to express the sanctification of our persons from inward outward defilements by the washing of water and washing the body yet not in the least to hint out the manner of baptizing by water as into the special administration of that Ordinance thus in Esa 1.16 when God saith to his backsliding people wash you make you clean must he needs mean go and be baptized but that outward expression is put for the reforming of their wayes and expounded by putting away the evil from their doings or works thus in Ioh. 13. Christ expresseth justification and sanctification by washing in general and then washing the feet he that is washed which is not baptized for Christ saith he must wash or else Peter could have no part in him and Christ did not baptize such a one need no more but to wash his feet that is walk holily so that here is washing and washing of the feet and yet neither meant of baptizing nor washing Thus likewise in the Corinthians it is said as to their sanctification Now you are washed now you are cleansed now you are justified he means not Now you are baptized but of the special purification of their hearts and lives from their former pollutions of flesh and spirit which though signified by baptism yet so remotely as no man can gather the constant method of external baptism from it Sixthly he saith your bodies washed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with clean or pure water now I hope as to baptizing none are so foolish as to stand on it whether they be baptized after a rain when the water is puddled or whether only in pure and crystal streams from an unpuddled spring or ocean and yet they must be tied to the one as the other if this Text be their president and we may as well question from this Text whether they be rightly baptized if there be any mud or slime or filth in the water as whether we baptized if all our bodies be not washed but now this expression to set forth holiness and sanctification is most apt and full of life our hearts and conversations in drawing nigh unto God should be as if externally they were washed with clean water transparent and spotless before him shining with an Evangelical brightness and spiritual purity for it will be very hard to draw nigh to God with a good conscience and a tainted and besmeared body or conversation with unholy acts whereby God is so much dishonoured especially to come as the Apostle saith in the former part of the verse with a true heart and full assurance of faith Seventhly if he had meant by this washing of the body baptizing he would not have made such a disproportion according to their own rule between the sign and thing signified for he speaks of the heart being only sprinkled and yet the body washed with clean water now if baptism doth not signifie and seal justification as well as sanctification it is not a seal of the Covenant of grace and if it do signifie it cannot go beyond the thing signified in expression and outward representation And if Christs blood in Heb. 12.24 be called the blood of sprinkling and it be one of the main things signified and sealed in baptism well may we answer it by an outward act without offence or sin Eighthly grant that by washing the body is meant baptizing here which you see cannot be extorted by violence or extracted by any chymical virtue yet it will not serve their turns For First the body is said to be washed when any one or more of the principal parts in sight or use are washed what is done to any eminent or commanding part it carries the denomination of the whole with it for Maries annointing and washing of Christs head and feet in Luke 7.44.45 is interpreted in Iohn 11.2 for the anointing of the Lord as much as if she had done it to all his body throughout though it is only exprest in the former place of the anointing and washing his head and feet This is most usual in Scripture Secondly if they will go to the strictness of the term of washing the body then First it must be washed naked or else it is not a a washnig of the body Secondly it must not be a bare dipping or plunging into water but some other act must be done with the body viz. a rinsing or rubbing as we do pots or cloaths which we wash which are not said to be washed because dipt under water but so rinsed as the filth and dirt is taken out I only urge this to shew the inevitable inconveniences these men will bring on themselves by such interpretations of Scripture Many other considerations might be added if this Tract would bear the weight of them CHAP. XVII A short summing up of the former principles and arguing them from the method of the Apostle Peter about those he baptized Acts 10.47 THat we may bring up all unto a full conclusion let that place be considered Acts 10.47 and the manner
have men to be gods to judge when men sing Psalms and Hymns and spiritual songs inwardly what need these names outwardly A more ungrounded opinion was never invented by the devil and surely he hath fitted it for the weaker and most perfectly captivated sorts of proselytes who have first lost their reasons and then their consciences Can my inward joy teach another or my private ejaculations admonish another I wish Satan have not these men at his will they would have singing to be an Ordinance but no man to hear them So that if singing be not a distinct visible Ordinance then no man can tell what it is to sing at all but the same with preaching praying talking or only an invisible motion of the soul known to God only which is most absurd when we look on the weight of these places of Scripture mentioned formerly Ob. If any object If singing be with the voice why not with other instruments as lute and harp and organs c as in the O. T. Sol. First in the New Testament the voice and the heart are only Gods instruments this holds forth the special way of worship from soul and body as from one person artificial instruments are laid aside not natural ones Secondly the voice is still required because it is the most immediate Interpreter of the heart and no outward instrument besides is so Thirdly nothing can be exprest so significantly in outward characters as by the voice and the best expressions of God we have in words and the tongue can best make out them Fourthly the union of heart and tongue or voice makes up the compleat expression of Gods praises without any other consideration for we have not now any thing as typical to look at as Lute and Harp c. were in the Old Testament to praises so ceremonies were to Christs sacrifice when the substance came they ceased there is no need of them now the spirit being more abundantly poured forth and they have no significancy but their needs soul and body alwayes to sing out Divine stories while in this world Fifthly this hath been prophesied of and long before the New Testament dayes by the Prophets of singing to God with a lively voice when the voice shall be as Lute and Harp and all instruments to God as in Esa 52.8 as Mr. Cotton in that precious Treatise of his worthy all mens consideration compared with Rom. 10 14. Psal 100.1 Psal 95 1 2. all places referring prophetically to the Gospel Sixthly if they dare grant this that there must be no singing by voice then they cut off themselves from any sort of singing by gift in Psalms or Hymns and spiritual Songs and any outward way of expressing Gods praises and must blot out singing in any way publickly as to be looked after though a person never so much inspired by the holy Ghost after their own sense should extemporarily compose and breath forth the most glorious Sonnets or heavenly Anthems for what is not a duty in it self and general in the nature of it is not a duty to the most raised spirit if never so well gifted in such a mystery But the wiser sort of the contrary judgment who consult with Scriptures and the nature of things will not own the dissent of others as to this but confess singing of Psalms must be by voice lay it on another foundation that it is Psalms c. but not these we sing that the command speaks of but Psalms of another constitution from a peculiar gift and so to be looked on by the Church viz. not to sing Davids Psalms or Asaphs or the like but from the fillings of the Spirit in such a person and on a sudden breaking forth for the edification of the Church I end this with what Zanchy faith on these places These words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 singing with grace in your hearts non excludunt vocem oris verum excludunt hypocrisin vanitatem ex qua fere loquuntur ebrii vino 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 valet atque 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they do not exclude the voice but hypocrisie and vanity from which men drunk with wine do sing and in your hearts is as much as from your hearts that is not vainly or as hypocritically but as from inward sense So the Greek Scholiasts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CHAP. II. What 's meant by these three expressions Psalms Hymns Spiritual Songs how they are used in the Old Testament and the New Testament from which the matter of singing is cleared THE next difference is about the matter of singing which all must grant to be Psalms and Hymns and Spiritual Songs but what these Psalms were c. and how to distinguish them one from another must be debated ere we can clear the point between these three expressions some constitute one difference some another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psalms say some are such Songs which were sung with other Instruments besides the tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hymns such as are made only to express the praises Zanchius and set out the excellencies of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Songs such as contain not only praises but exhortations prophesies thanksgiving and these only sung with the voyce and tongue Others difference them thus Psalms are those which were pen'd by David and others drawn up into meeter to be sung in the Temple in a musical strain Hymns are those extemporal praises which break forth upon occasion from a heart filled with the Spirit Grotius and observant of Gods goodness Songs or Odes they call such that were premeditated not without some art These they call the Songs of Moses Deborah Hannah Simeon Mary c. But we shall find if we consult the use of the words the difference will not be considerable between them and that they are used promiscuously in the Old Testament from whence we must learn how they are to be taken in the New Now 1. I find they are used in general as the title of Davids Psalms which are named promiscuously by these three words 2. That the three Hebrew words viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mizmor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schir 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tehillim to which these these three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do fully answer are used in the Psalms one for another without distinction and sometimes two of them joyned together as the title of one Psalm sometimes all three joyned together in one title we could heap up examples in this kind Iudges 5.3 saith Deborah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will sing I will sing unto the Lord it 's translated by the 70 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is two words the one used for a Psalm the other for an Ode or Song put to express one act 1 Chron. 16.9 the two same words are translated thus in the 70 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sing unto the Lord sing a Hymn unto the Lord. In Psal 105.3 which
is the matter for reading preaching intepretation but he here names that part of the Word which belongs to the duty he enjoynes as a speciall part of that Word which ought to dwell richly in them as to such a duty of singing So that 1. If Psalmes and Hymnes and Songs be part of the word of God then they may be sung 2. If that part of the Word be more properly fitted to the duty commanded then any other it must be so restrained here 3. That it is so appears because he speakes so particularly That the Word might dwell in them richly teaching and admonishing one another not in generall as by Preaching Doctrine or the like but in Psalmes and Hymnes and spirituall Songs which must needs be the great duty in the Text and all before restricted to that 4. Then the Word of God in generall or any speciall Word of God may be said to dwell richly in a person when the spirituall intent sense and meaning of it with the inward spirit and power of it upon all occasions doth appeare in the duties commanded by it and thus you may see the verse in its parts 1. Here is the duty singing 2. The Word of God the matter 3. The specialty of the Word so fitted to the nature of that duty Psalmes Hymnes and spirituall Songs 4. The peculiar way how to be a perfect spirituall Singer it is to have this word dwell in a man and richly having the true sense sweet experience of this word in the heart being upon all occasions able to cull out in the language of Scripture Psalmes Hymnes and Songs suitable to our owne conditions or others If the Apostle had meant here a gift of composing new Psalmes c. as he would not have used the Old Testament language without an explanation so he would not have mentioned the word of God in such a close limitation as in Psalmes and Hymnes and Songs which are exegeticall to the word of God to be sung if he had not intended that part of the Word as fitted for that Ordinance for no man knowes what these expressions hold forth but as they are found in the word of God and as a distinct and eminent part of it It were more proper to say Let the grace of God dwell in you or the goodnesse of God that you may from the sense of it break forth upon all occasions to praises But to name the Word of God and name it with that modification as Psalms Hymns Songs which we all know is a part of it and bid us sing and deny us in his intention for to sing these Psalmes which are part of that Word is too unworthy a reflection on the Holy Ghost and the Pen-men of Scripture And that seemes very strange to affirme that I may not sing that Word of God which is called by the name of Psalmes Hymnes and Songs when this Word must dwell in me richly to that end and use Lastly the singing of these Psalmes Hymnes and Songs as the Word of God is most adapt and proportioned to the particular use the Apostle intended by singing in the Church which was to teach and admonish one another Now no gift of any Saint can be so powerfull and authoritative to teach as the Word of God in these Psalmes which were pen'd by the spirit as a rule to all Saints and their gifts and as the Word of God is made use of severall wayes to teach and admonish so this is one speciall way by Psalmes Hymnes Songs VVhen I sing by a pretended gift I see cause of jealousie that it may be more a fancy then the spirit every man hath cause of suspition from whence it comes and ere I can be satisfied I must compare it with and try it by the Scripture straine of Psalmes Hymnes and Songs But by singing the very words of Scripture with sense and experience I teach both by my holy carriage in the action and the word it selfe commands by its owne authority as when it is read But that I may more clearely open this how that the Word of God in Psalmes Hymnes and Songs is the most fit matter of singing let us view that part of the Word called by these names and see how far it will reach this kinde of edification beyond all that which may come from a present gift to compose matter for such a duty 1. Besides the spirituall elegancy of phrase the inspired style of that part of holy writ which is beyond ordinary with the height of matter of no vulgar composure it having such a standing stamp of Divine authority on it must needes conveigh its sense with more weight and power then any thing from particular invention though assisted by a gift of the spirit which comes but in the second place and cannot be put in any consideration with that authority as the other nor inserted among the heavenly Canons and Scripture rules for Saints to build their faith on or direct their lives 2. The largenesse and comprehensivenesse of the scope of the shortest Psalme is so that it will give matter to study and ponder on and give advantage to enlarge our thoughts and affections on more then any particular gift of any Saint now can be rationally conceived to afford for commonly the best gifts are but an enlargement of the first text and bring forth nothing de novo no new thing and all these Saints with all their gifts must be glad to have recourse to that part of the Word as the rest for the fulnesse of teaching and admonition 3. The variety of matter in these Psalmes c. is so wonderfull that they doe provide before-hand by an eternall wisdome for the conditions of all Saints either personally or mystically that no man sing any thing but if that Word dwell in him richly he may finde a suitable Psalme prepared for him by the foresight and wise and infallible directions of the Almighty and in this the Booke of the Psalmes transcends all other parts of Scripture and may be called the Epitome of the whole Bible In some Scriptures you have little but matter of precept in others little but historicall relations of persons and actions but in the Book of the Psalmes you have the variety of matter contained in all the whole Scripture most suitable to the vast duty of singing praises 1. Matter of all sorts of prophesies referring to the very latter end of the world 2. All sorts of generall and speciall directions either for Faith or Life 3. All sorts of promises fitted to particular conditions 4. All sorts of experiences in what condition a soul may be in either of tryall or triumph either to soule or body 5. All sorts of signes and characters of heavenly motions and frames to God 6. All sort of thanksgivings and prayses for spirituall or temporall mercies with their various discords which makes up the harmony of the whole He is a childe in the Scripture that doth not