a regular Admission of them should be by the Gate And the same Power of the Keys which opens the Gate to them at their Admission should lock them in after they are once admitted I know no possibility they have of avoiding these Consequences unless they can shew either that a Body Politick can subsist without Government or that Government can subsist without a right of imposing in things indifferent either of which indeed would be a great Performance If therefore to avoid the odium of so hard Terms imposed on us of an Admission which when it is made shall give us no longer security of their Union with us than themselves please they will pretend a Defference to our Common Ecclesiastical Authority that may keep them ours by Principles afterwards I could then wish that they would be pleas'd to consider farther that when a true Authority is once admitted That must be allowed to judge concerning the Exigences of the Society to which it is related and therefore to judge concerning the true mean between both extremes of what is deficient and what is superfluous I mean so as to conclude the subject in Affairs of that Nature This Consideration will shew that were there indeed any excess yet the Authority would be responsible for it but not to the Subject to whom it owes no account but to God from whom the Authority is indeed received This will shew that the subject cannot be responsible for the Sin of the Imposition so long as there can be prov'd no Sin in submitting to the Imposition because the Imposition is a right to which the Subject cannot pretend Where therefore the Sin of Imposition is separable from the Sin of Submission there certainly the Duty of Submission still holds The Reason is manifest because the Subject cannot deny its Duty for a Cause that does not concern it to enquire into and for which it is not responsible unto God whatever may be amiss in it And this will always be the Case whilst the Impositions are only in matters of their own Nature indifferent BUT our Author pleases himself particularly XXIII The ceasing of Instrumental Musick Rev. 18. 22. describes a great Calamity but does not prove its unlawfulness with a Passage in the Revevelations where it is foretold concerning Babylon That the Voice of Harpers and Musicians and of Pipers and Trumpeters should be heard no more in her Rev. xviii 22. He urges it modestly and it became him to do so having before decried all Arguing from that same Book because of its Obscurity The Reason holds in reference to Facts to come These are the things wherein the Prophetical Style is professedly obscure even to those who were then living not so in Facts then being or past These there is no Reason to believe that God intended to conceal from the meanest Capacities because they were not likely to hinder the Free-wills which were to contribute their Parts in fulfilling the Prophesies here delivered And of this kind are the Allusions for which we are at present concern'd to the then present Customs of the Church of Jerusalem But to urge the Authority of this Book as our Adversary does with relation to the State of Antichrist is to urge it in a Sense wherein God usually design'd that his Prophecies should not be understood till they were fulfilled that they might not give warning to those who were to fulfill them as they must certainly do if they could certainly be understood before Till therefore this Prophesie if it relate to Antichrist be fulfilled it is not to be expected that it should be understood so certainly as to be Argumentative But to give him the utmost that he can with any Reason desire all that he can make of it is only to have it understood as a Prophesie not as a Law as a Prediction of the event not as a Determination of what was lawful or unlawful It is very common in the Prophetick Scriptures to foretel Judgments by the deprivation of what was delightful on any account Good or Evil even on account of Religion as well as Luxury So Hosea Prophesies that the Children of Israel should abide many Days without a King and without a Prince and without a Sacrifice and without an Ephod Hos. iii. 4. Can our Adversary therefore gather that Kings and Sacrifices and Ephods were Sins then No but it is denounced as the most afflictive thing to them who in the midst of their Impieties were full of their Pretensions of Zeal for God and for his Temple Jer. vii 4. The like Predictions against the Temple as a Punishment of the unworthy Worshipers in it are frequently mention'd on other occasions also which can by no means be interpreted as a Condemnation of the Temple then but rather of the People as unworthy of so great a Favour So in the Babylonish Captivity they are represented as hanging their Harps on the Willows when their Adversaries insultingly demanded of them one of the Songs of Sion Psal. cxxxvii 2 3 4. We cannot therefore conclude that the Temple-Songs play'd on their Harps were sinful then but unseasonable not suitable to the Condition they were then in and the Behaviour that became them in the desolation of the Temple So God threatens to turn their Feasts into Mourning and their Songs into Lamentation Am. viii 10. Hos. ii 11. We must not rherefore say that their holy Feasts or Songs were sinful All that is imply'd thereby is only this that they should be so estranged from Joy that it should find no place in their holiest Offices even of Religion So Job expresses the sadness of his Condition My Harp also is turned into mourning and my Organ into the Voice of them that Weep Job xxx 31. So in Isa. xxiv 8. The mirth of Tabrets ceaseth the noise of them that rejoice endeth the Joy of the Harp ceaseth And in Ezek. xxvi I will cause the noise of thy Songs to cease and the sound of thy Harps shall be no more heard Who sees not from these and the like Places that these Expressions are used to describe a State not Sinful but Penal rather and Calamitous The same appears from the other things following in this very Text concerning which we are disputing of the Revelations It follows And no Crafts-man of whatsoever Craft he be shall be found any more in thee Will our Adversary therefore say that all sorts of Crafts are here condemn'd as unlawful It is easie to observe that there is nothing more foretold in these Words but the failing of the Trade of Babylon for which she had been so very famous It follows farther And the sound of a Milstone shall be heard no more in thee and the light of a Candle shall shine no more at all in thee Must Milstones therefore and Candles be unlawful also This only shews a Famine that should befall them and a want of Corn to employ the Millstone as cleanness of Teeth for want of Bread to
says Something more has been said against the use of Organs in Sacris than what is Ans. p. 84. to be found among the Objections in the Author's Sermon yet a very mean Reply which has been given by one will shew that what has been farther and more closely Objected by the Answerer does not at all invalidate the Lawfulness Use and Advantages of them in the Christian Church After all I have one thing to Advertise the Reader that to avoid prolixity as much as I well could writing not a compleat Tract but only a Preface to one I have frequently in quoting the Answerer and other Authors not set down their words at large but the Sense in brief referring to them in the Margin and that without any the least design of Unfairness or Partiality And in the whole I hope my unknown Adversary cannot say but I have treated him with all becoming Candor and Civility I wish the Reader could say so too having kept him so long from the following Treatise John Newte The Contents I. THe Apostles Communicated with Instrumental Musick after their declaring against the obligation of the Mosaick Law on Gentile Proselytes and therefore could not thereby intend to Condemn it as unlawful p. 1. II. Sodid the Gentiles also as far as it was in the Power of the Apostles to permit them p. 5. III. The Apostles reasoned from the Law to the Gospel otherwise than our Adversaries do now p. 7. IV. And indeed were to be presumed most likely to do so considering their Education p. 10. V. The chief new Revelation made to the Apostles was that the Gentiles might be admitted into the new Peculium Immediatly without Circumcision p. 13. VI. This was Consequently a repeal of the Mosaical dispensation so far as it was inconsistent with it p. 16. VII Those particulars were indeed inconsistent which are supposed unlawful in the N. T. p. 20. VIII This inconsistency cannot be pretended in the case of Instrumental Musick p. 21. IX The Apostles Argue even in Abrogated instances from the Law to the Gospel so far as the Parity of Reason holds p. 25. X. The same Reasons which made Instrumental Musick fit for Sacrifices in the Apostles Days make it fit still p. 28. XI The Benefit of Musick in holy Offices thought Natural and and not ascribed to any Extraordinary Providence p. 32. XII The Influences of good and evil Spirits upon Man such as may be promoted or obstructed by Instrumental Musick p. 36. XIII Such a notion of the Spiritualness of our Religion as makes uncapable of Sensible Assistants as is fundamentally inconstent with the Doctrine of the Apostolical Age. p. 47. XIV The same Reasons that proved bodily worship useful in the Mosaick discipline prove it so still p. 52. XV. The worship of God in Spirit not opposed to that which is sensible and Corporeal but to the literal sense of the Law of Moses p. 55. XVI Nothing therefore can be objected to Instrumental Musick that is inconsistent with the Spiritual Nature and worship of the Gospel p. 61. XVII Pomp and Magnificence of the External worship is not inconsistent with the desigen of the Gospel p. 65. XVIII Magnificence not Repugnant to the simplicity of the Gospel p. 70. XIX Sacred Dances not unlawful but not therefore necessary to be Restored if Instrumental Musick be so p. 71. XX. The Jewish Circumcision contrary to the design of the Gospel the Gentiles nothing to our adversaries purpose the Case of neither of them like that of Instrumental Musick p. 77. XXI No Bloody Sacrifices whatsoever were sit for the design of the Christian Sacrifices p. 80. XXII No Reason for opposing the first Imposition whilst Lawful for fear of Rigours afterwards p. 87. XXIII The Ceasing of Instrumental Musick Rev. 18. 22. describes a great Calamity but does not prove its unlawfulness p. 93. XXIV Dr. Lightfoot's observation that the Temple worship was wholly ceremonious and the Synagogue worship wholly Moral is not true p. 97. XXV The Instrumental Musick had been a Shadow of the Organical worship of our bodies under the Gospel that would not prove it inconsistent with it yet that it was a Shadow of it cannot be easily proved p. 105. XXVI All Symbols of those times did not foretell any future innovations which should abolish them Instrumental Musick could not be abrogated by the Organical worship of the body being a Shadow of it p. 108. XXVII The Harping in Heaven could not by the Reasoning of that Age be taken for a Shadow p. 112. XXVIII Incense might have been used by the Apostles after the destruction of the Temple p. 120. XIX The Reasonings of the Fathers produced by our Adversary in this Cause are quite different from those of the Apostolical Age it self p. 125. XXX The next Age to the Apostles seems to have discontinued Instrumental Musick without any dislike of it The true design of the Reasoning from the estate of Child-hood and weak and Beggarly Elements Explained p. 128. XXXI So Explained They conclude nothing to the purpose of those Fathers or our Adversaries p. 137. Errata in the Preface PAge 12. l. 4. Popish r. Popery l. 28. give r. gave Instances p. 26. l. 13. Perswasions r. Pensions p. 31. l. 9. when they had r. when he had p. 32. l. 13. enjoyned in it blot in p. 55. l. 27. blot out them r. That it is l. 28. r. Then that it was not p. 59. l 19. this r. the. ERRATA PAge 9. l. 1. propagating p. 33. Leaprosy p. 44. l. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 46. l. 18. a Comma after directly p. 58. marg 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 63. l. 7. divided p. 63. l. 21. it 's p. 66. l. 15. Testament p. 70. l. 19. disprov'd But. l. 22. after Scriptures add now also to have produced the Scriptures p. 71. l. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 24. Bounteousness p. 73. l. 4. sacred Dancing p. 74. marg 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rest of that Testimony of Ignatius is omitted or false printed It should be thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Ep. ad Ephes. N. 4. This is continued afterwards p. 75. marg where it should be blotted out p. 75. l. 6. Apocryphal l. 10 11. Clemens mentions l. 15. notoriously l. 18. improbable p. 76. l. 13. Instrumental l. 17. accompanied p. 77. l. 12 13. practic'd p. 82. l. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 84. l. 19. after to add be p. 87. l. 1. particular l. 8. Heavenly p. 88. l. 8. peace p. 90. l. antep Deference p. 91. l. 26. Deference p. 97. l 7. and the voice of the Bride shall l. 18. Festivityes p. 99. l. 4. was l. 25. del often p. 100. l. 16. granted r. grounded p. 102. l. 4. Antecedent l. 5. indeed l. 12. must l.
oblig'd to Communicate with the Apostles must also have Communicated with the Sacrifices and other Solemnities of the Temple in order to the obtaining those Mystical Benefits of which the Jews were made partakers by those Solemnities among others by their Hymns seconded with Musick not only Vocal but Instrumental How so if that Instrumental Musick had been unlawful even to the Gentiles A Doctrine in it self so incredible III. The Apostles reasoned from the Law to the Gospel otherwise than our Adversaries do now ought in Reason to have very evident Proof before it be receiv'd And what Proof can our Adversaries pretend to that can be thought so evident Have they any express Testimonies of the N. T. that Musical Instruments in the Service of God are unlawful sufficient to countervail that notoriety of Fact avowedly practic'd to the contrary If this cannot be pretended have they at least any evident Prohibition of it that might make it unlawful for the future when this dependence of the Christian Church on the Jewish Establishment was to expire I know no Evidence of either kind that themselves pretend to Well then will they pretend to any evident Proof of any other Proposition from whence this must necessarily follow They tell us indeed that all the Jewish Law that was not Moral or Judicial was in course not only to cease to be obliging but also to begin to be unlawful from the Promulgation of the Gospel But what Proof can they produce for this Proposition so crudely and so generally express'd No plain Testimony of the N. T. that I know of Can they therefore say that it is at least supposed in the Reasonings of the N. T Where do they find that the Apostles argue that any thing was to be antiquated under the New Testament for no other Reason but because it was prescribed under the Old So far from that that we have many Examples of the Apostles and Apostolical Writers Reasoning from the Old Testament to the New The Adversaries of Tythes pretend that Tythes are not to be paid to the Ministers of the Gospel now because they were imposed as a Duty to the Levitical Priesthood St. Paul argues directly contrary that 1 Cor. ix 13. 14. because the Levitical Priests lived by the Altar then therefore they who Preach the Gospel now should also live by the Gospel He reasons the same way when 1 Cor. ix 9. 10. 1 Tim. v. 17. 18. he proves that because the Law required that the Ox's Mouth should not be muzled when he trod out their Corn that was the ancientest way of Threshing in imitation as it should seem of their Treading out their Vintage therefore the Clergy shoul partake of the Contributions of the Church which themselves laid out for the use of the Poor who were maintained by those Contributions So he allows the Reasoning against Christians Marrying Persons of another Communion from the Jews Obligation not to Marry Persons of another Nation in order to their Propogating a holy Seed So he also Reasons himself that as the Jews 1 Cor. vii 14. did allow that the holiness of one Parent was sufficient to entitle their common Off-spring to the Foederal holiness of Circumcision so the holiness of one Parent by the Rules of Christianity was also sufficient to entitle the Children of such Marriages to the Foederal holiness of Christianity by Baptism This he supposes when he thence infers that the Believer was under no Obligation of breaking such a Matrimonial Contract on account of that Objection insisted on for doing so that is of the holiness of the Seed with which such Marriages were conceived inconsistent For himself had Circumcis'd Acts xvi 1. St. Timothy on account of his Mother who was a Jewess tho' his Father was a Heathen No doubt on account of the receiv'd allow'd practice of the Jews whom he design'd to gratify by doing so On the same Topick his Fellow-labourer Clem. Rom. ep ad Corin. St. Clement concludes the Sacredness of the Gospel Ministry from all the ways God had used for asserting the inviolable Sanctity of the Levitical Priesthood against Laical encroachments How contrary is this whole way of Reasoning to that used by our Adversaries on many others as well as this Occasion And yet it was indeed no other than IV. And indeed were to be presumed most likely to do so considering their Education what was to be expected in their Circumstances considering the History of those Times Our Adversaries may be pleased to remember that when those Scriptures were Written on which they ground their contrary way of Reasoning the whole Church was Govern'd by the Apostles whose place of Residence as of a Body was at Jerusalem They may remember farther that the Apostles themselves as Jews were possess'd with the same prejudices of Education as the rest of their Nation in favour of their present Establishment and against unnecessary Innovations St. Paul had Persecuted the Church on account of his Zeal And St. Simeon for the same Reason had got the Sirname of Zealot And St. Peter's concern for the Law he had been bred in appeared on all occasions His Hunger could not make him eat what his Education had oblig'd him to believe common and unclean And he avoided eating with the Gentiles that he might avoid offence of the Jews which came from Jerusalem It also thence appear'd how cautious the Apostles themselves were oblig'd to be in admitting Innovations if they would maintain the good Opinion they were possess'd of with their own Charge of Jerusalem who were also as St. James assures us Zealous of the Law We have therefore reason to believe that they would not admit of any Revelation that was not very clear against the then received Opinions Whatever their own private Opinions might have been yet we have reason to believe that they would not have ventured to publish and practice Opinions in favour of Innovation without such Evidence as as might satisfie others as well as themselves if they would preserve the good Opinion of the Zealots mentioned by St. James and keep them with their Zeal from Apostatizing from the Christian Religion notwithstanding Innovations so contrary to the Opinions they had been bred in But where can our Adversaries find any Testimony so express in the Writings of the N. T. that all the Ritual and Ceremonial Precepts of the Law were to be abrogated upon the promulgation of the Gospel that even the Jews by extraction should be discharg'd from the Obligation under which they had been formerly of observing them Whence can they prove that thenceforward it must have been unlawful by the Law of Christianity for them to observe them tho' with no regard to the former divine Legislation which had impos'd those ceremonial Precepts on the whole Peculium but on account of the humane Authority whereby particular Churches may provide for their Bodies without imposing on other Churches of equal Authority with themselves