AN ANSWER TO Richard Allen's Essay, Vindication and Appendix, WHEREIN He endeavours to prove, that, Singing of Psalms with Conjoined Voices is a Christian Duty.  
By R. C.  
LONDON, Printed in the Year, 1697.   

TO THOSE Christian Friends, Who were CONTRIBUTORS TOWARDS Mr. Claridge's BOOK.  
Beloved in our Lord Jesus Christ,  
BEing desired by some Worthy Brethren in London, to signify unto you, That whereas there hath been a Mode of Singing set up and practised (of late) by some of our Brethren, by such limited and prestinted Forms and Tunes invented by Men; wherein all the People join together, both Saints and Sinners, young and old, holy and profane, under the specious pre●ence of a Church-Ordinance and Gospel-Duty, without any foundation from the Word of Christ for their so doing. Divers of us have endeavoured to stem that current of Innovation, and repair that Breach made in the Church of Christ, lest it should deluge all those of our Profession by the Impetuosity of its Innundation; and we hope our Labours herein have been of use to many, for their Satisfaction, altho' others have turned the Deaf Ear upon us, and persisted in their way of Common Popular Singing.  
This is therefore to acquaint you, that whereas Mr. Richard Claridge, (one whom I highly esteem and honour for his Parts and Learning) was pleased above twelve Months since (of his own Accord) to write a Treatise in Answer to Mr. Richard Allen's Essay, Vindication and Appendix; he did communicate the same, either in part or in whole, to Mr. William Kiffin, Mr. Robert Steed, and Mr. Isaac Marlowe, and myself; and we were of Opinion the printing of it would be of use; upon which 〈◊〉 Specimen being printed, Notice was given to Divers Friends both in City and Country▪ some of which did willingly contribute toward its furtherance, and we hoped it might have bee● completed before now.  
But after Eight Sheets had been printed off it was discerned that the Author had mad● some Alteration in the Copy, which we coul● not consent unto, because it appeared to u● to be different from those common principles o● Christianity we profess, by which we should hav● been rendered incapable to have recommended 〈◊〉 to your Perusal. And because he would n● be prevailed upon to obliterate the same, an● suffer it to be printed according to that Cop● which he read to those Brethren ; which would have amounted unto about twenty Sheets, you must now be contented with these Eight Sheets only. It cannot be imagined that I (above all Men) should have the least thought of Prejudice against the Author, because he hath (without any request of mine) been pleased to Vindicate me from those Reflections R. A. hath cast upon me: For which I do hereby return him thanks. And by what you may see in these few sheets, where any Occasion hath occurred, you may be able to make a true Judgement of the rest. Had I therefore preferred my private Interest to the Honour of Truth, I should for that Reason have desired the publication of the whole. But through the Grace of God I am made willing to sacrifice all my own private Interest to the Honour of Christ, whensoever his Service shall call for it.  
As to what you are here presented with, I have carefully perused it, and so far as I can discern, it is (in the general) Sound and Orthodox, and fit to be considered by all such who desire Information about this Controversy. For,  
1. He hath sufficiently discovered his Antagonists pretence, that Singing of Psalms (as they practise it) is a Christian Duty, from the pretended Morality of it; and added five Arguments to prove, that according to R. A's. own reasoning, it's no Christian Duty.  
2dly. He proves, that singing of Psalms (as aforesaid) is not the Duty of every Christian, from the Example of Christ, as R. A▪ pretends; because it is not certain that Christ and his Disciples did then sing vocally together.  
3dly. He proves, that the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth not in its primary Signification denote Singing; but it's first and simple Signification is to Praise, and that without Singing: And that it is not restrained to God (a● R. A. pretends) but is spoken of Men, and other things also.  
The Primary Signification of this Wor● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he proves from several Authorities.  
1. From Heathen Writers, of very grea● Antiquity.  
2. From the Septuagint and Apocrypha●  
3. From the best Greek Lexicographers.  
4. From many Learned Translators of, an● Commentators upon Mat. 26.30. and Act● 16.25. together with a most Learned an● Elaborate Account of the Signification of th● Greek Word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and shows R. A. his Mistakes about it.  
By all which it will evidently appear to an● Unbyass'd Person, that all their pretences from the Etymology, and principal Signification o● those Words, Hymneo and Hymnos, [tha● Ptaising God without Singing doth fully answer all that they can pretend to from thos● Words, according to the prime Signification known, approved, and constant use thereof, and hath been so understood by the Learned, and was so rendered in their Old Translations of the Bible, until another mode of praising God, viz. Singing in Rhyme, came to be in use in the last Century: After which they were pleased, for the Credit of their own invented Form, to add the Word Sing, in divers places of Holy Scripture: By which an Advantage hath been taken to impose upon, and deceive the Ignorant and Unwary Reader.  
Our Brethren have invented different ways to support their Tottering Cause. As,  
First, By telling us its a Christian Duty, because it's a Moral Duty, and so the Duty of all Men, being taught them by the Dictates of the Light of Nature: Although it is to be remembered, that at the same time they went to a Singing-Master to be taught it, which (in my Opinion) confuted all those pretences without any further Trouble. But I would de●ire our Brethren to consider, whether such a position may not induce some to turn Deists, when they are told, that they may attain such knowledge of their Duties as they speak of, in a ●reat measure without Revelation; in case they ●hould believe what they say to be true. For ●esides what our Author hath said upon it, ●he late Reverend Doctor Manton, in his Xth. Sermon upon Heb. 11. v. 3. saith thus, That Reason is not the Judge of Controversies in Religion, and the Doubts that do arise about the Matters of God are not to be determined by the Dictates of Nature. If then we leave the Written Word, and follow the Guidance of our own Reason, we shall but puzzle ourselves with impertinent Scruples, and leave ourselves under a Dissatisfaction. This is the Inlet of all Atheism and Profaneness, when Men set up Reason as the highest Tribunal.  
Secondly, When this will not do, Then they say, we must Sing as they did under the Law, and that there is no other way prescribed how we should sing: But when we have showed them, that there was no such Singing practised under the Law, as they now use: And that the Psalms of David, etc. were not originally written in Rhyme, nor sung in their manner: Then,  
Thirdly, They tell us they have Apostolical Injunction for it, and the Example of Christ and his Apostles. And when they have been forced to confess they cannot prove their Mode of singing from thence: Then,  
Fourthly, As their Ultimum Refugium, They tell us, that Christian Churches have Liberty to order such accidental Modes and Circumstances of Divine Worship as are not particularly prescribed in the Word, as they shall judge most for Edification. And these External Modes and Circumstances of Worship, they take to be in the power of the Major Part of a Church, so far, as to warrant their own practice therein. Now if we should be no wiser than to follow such Direction, it might lead us to Rome, as well as to Geneva; where their practice of Singing was at first Erected.  
But this hath been sufficiently answered by Mr. Isaac Marlowe, in his Clear Confutation of R. A. and his five Commendators, even from their own Confessions, etc. to which I refer you.  
I shall only add a few Passages out of Mr. Mather's late Book, called a Discussion, etc. where he saith, in page 132, 133. etc. No Difficulty or Severity of the Times can alter the Rule given by Christ unto his Church. And speaking of what some suppose may be done in point of Prudence, besides that Rule, He saith, Prudence hath its Scope only in such things in Church-worship, as are no part of the Worship, but only Circumstances thereof related to Worship, not as it is Worship, but as an Action performed by Men, all whose Actions must have Time and Place for them: But when Place and Time come under an Institution, there Prudence may not alter them; nor may we swerve from the Rule, for they (then) become Parts of Worship.  
Now if our brethren's practice as to their manner of Singing, is not a part of Divine Instituted Worship, but only an External, Accidental Mode and Circumstance thereof, as they themselves are pleased to tell us, then why do they impose it upon their Churches, as if it were the highest part of Divine Worship; surely they have No New Commission from Christ to exercise a Legislative Power, by the Major part of the Members of their Churches, who can never (by their Vote) make an External and Accidental Mode of performing an Outward Action, a part of Divine Worship, if God hath not appointed it; for none can alter the Nature of things but God alone. But I have no leisure at this time to enlarge upon this Subject, but shall beg of God to give you Understanding in this and all other parts of his Revealed Will; and Subscribe myself,  
Your Servant for Christ's sake, William Russel. From my House in Barbican, December 22. 1697.   

AN ANSWER TO Richard Allen's Essay, Vindication, and Appendix, WHEREIN He endeavours to prove, that, Singing of Psalms with Conjoined Voices is a Christian Duty.  

Animadversions on some Passages in R. A's Introduction.  

●ntroduc.  THE only way for us to Glorify God, and to make our Passage through this Vale of Tears, in any measure comfortable, is to pray and labour for more of those beautifying Graces of Charity, Meekness, and mutual Forbearance; that so far as we have attained, we may walk together by the same Rule, and wherein we yet differ, humbly wait upon God for a more complete discovery of his Mind to us. p. 2.  
Animadv. Charity, Meekness, and Forbearance are beautifying Graces indeed, and were neve● more wanting, than in this Censorious and Litigious Age; for the Contentions that have been rai●ed, through the differing Opinions which some Me● have imbibed from those of their Brethren, abo●● Religious Matters, are fomented to that degree● that what were but small Sparks at the first, a● now increased into Violent Flames, which threate● Ruin and Desolation on every Side.  
As the Presence and Vigour of the forementioned Graces make Religion lovely, and Christia● Society comfortable; so the Absence or Deca● thereof renders the one unamiable, and the oth● irksome and uneasy: How delightful and inviting is it on the one hand, to behold, Brethren dwelli● together in Unity, and forbearing one another in Lov● and how uncomfortable is that Prospect on the ●ther, wherein little else save Strife and Conten●on are presented to our View! It therefore great● concerneth all those, who would be accounted t● Sons of Peace, and Wellwishers to the Prosperity of Zion, to Pray and Labour indeed for more 〈◊〉 those cooling, as well as beautifying Graces of Charity, Meekness and Forbearance, for the quenchi● those Flames, which the contrary Vices have kindle● and removal of those Causes of Uneasiness, whi● have thereby been introduced.  
He adds, That so far as we have attained, we ma● walk together by the same Rule, and wherein we y● differ, humbly wait upon God for a more comple● discovery of his Mind to us. An Excellent End! the stronger, who have arrived to higher Attai●ments, Bear with their weaker Brethren, and n● Impose a Snare or Yoke upon their Consciences.  
Introduc. It's too well known to be conceals that such different Apprehensions there are between us, and some of our Dear Brethren, abo● singing of Psalms; which we are fully persuaded, with the Generality of the Reformed Churches, is an Eminent Part of Christian Worship; but divers of our Brethren are of a different Persuasion. page 2.  
Animadv. But then, the Question is what kind Vocal Singing is so? I answer, Not Conjoint Sing●g of a precomposed Form, either in Prose or ●etre with many Voices together, whether of Believes or Unbelievers, in an Artificial Tune; which is ●eaded for by this Author. But such a Vocal ●nging of one Person at a time, as is a Special Gift the Holy Spirit; i. e. When a Person Sings by ●●spiration of God, without all help of Humane ●t or Skill, having the Psalm, Hymn, or Spirital Song, dictated for the Matter, and directed ●t the Manner, immediately from above: Others ●no are present, and have their Souls touched by ●e same Holy Spirit, keeping silence with the ex●rnal Voice, but making Melody in their Hearts ●to the Lord.  
Now, tho' the Generality of the Reformed church's, (as he styles them) are for Set-form Sing●g with United Voices in an Artificial Tune; will ●eir Unwarrantable Practice make such Singing Justi●ble and Authentic? Universality and Consent are ● good Arguments, where the Point under Debate made a Case of Religion, and cannot be defended 〈◊〉 Scripture Authority: This Instance is brought 〈◊〉 his great Disadvantage, if I had a mind to im●ove it against him. For are not the Generality 〈◊〉 the Reformed Churches, partly for Prelatical, ●d partly for Presbyterian Government? Some ●r Set-forms of Public Prayer, and Most for In●nt-Baptism? I would therefore ask him, what ●e thinks of this Generality? Are there not a great ●any Relics of Rome yet standing, and doth not ●e Reformation itself, (as 'tis called) cry aloud for a Reformation, especially the Major part?  
But divers of our Brethren (saith he) are 〈◊〉 a different Persuasion: And 'tis hoped, they w● be enabled by the Grace of God so to continue; 〈◊〉 cause your Persuasion about singing after the Common, Popular Way, doth not appear by any thi● yet that I have seen written in Favour of it, 〈◊〉 have the least Foundation in Scripture.  
Introduc. So far as I can apprehend the No●ons of our Brethren, they themselves are of deferent Judgements about this Practice.  
Animadv. What Cause then have we to Pr● that God would be pleased to send forth his L● and his Truth, that we may all come to the Knowledge 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.  perf●ly joined together in the same m● and in the same judgement, 1 〈◊〉 1.10. and that all those w● are so much for Humane ●cency and Order in the Worship of God, may the Vanity of such Attempts, and return to C●● the Apostle and High Priest of our Profession, 〈◊〉 to his own Appointments, as they are in their Na● Simplicity and Beauty, without the adventit● Garnish of Man.  
Introduc. Some seem to think, that singing 〈◊〉 a part of the Worship peculiar to the J● Church, and that therefore 'tis abolished u● the New Testament. Others seem to allow of s●ing still, but suppose it to consist only in Joyful of Heart, and that it should not be Vocal. Ag● others seem to allow of Vocal Singing, but ●ny the warrantableness of Conjoint Singing, 〈◊〉 many Voices together. Some Scruples arise a● the Matter, and others about the Manner of Singing.  
Animadv. The whole Controversy is reducib● t●ese two Heads, viz. The Matter and Manner of ●●nging; and therefore the Enumeration of the ●●her particular Differences is unnecessarily pre●●sed. But seeing they are mentioned, as the se●●al Opinions of Brethren about Singing, I can●●t omit the Misrepresentation given of the two for●●r of them. For they who think that Conjoint ●●ging with many Voices together, was a part of ●●e Worship peculiar to the Jewish Church, do ●●t think that all Singing is abolished under the ●●w Testament; tho' 'tis their Opinion, that uni● Vocal Singing is. Nor do I know of any who ● so for silent Singing, as to allow of none that is ●cal. That Vocal Singing which, I conceive, they accept against, is by a Set-form of Words, either of ●e Single Voice, or with Plurality of Voices, and ●une taught and learned by Art.  
Introduc." That therefore I may in some measure, 〈◊〉 possible, convince the Opposers of this our Practise, satisfy those that are doubting, confirm ●hose that are wavering, and defend it from the ●eavy Charge which some bring against it, of ●eing a groundless and superstitious Innovation, 〈◊〉 shall endeavour to clear these five things.  
1." That singing the Praises of God is a Christian Duty, and not peculiar to the Jewish Church.  
2." What singing is; That 'tis properly an Action of the Voice, and not of the Heart only.  
3." That Conjoint Singing of many Voices together is warrantable.  
●." What we are to sing.  
5." How we are to sing.  
" And under each of these, I shall endeavour to remove all the Scruples of our Brethren that descent ●rom us, so far as they come to my Mind.  
Animadv. How well this Author hath acquitted ●self in the Task he hath undertaken, will be ● in the Examination of his Book; my Design is to follow him according to his own Metho● and to weigh all that he offers as Argumentati● for his Opinion, in the Balance of the Sanctuary Whereby the Impartial Reader may judge, wheth● or no the Truth lies on his side the Scale, or ou● He tells us in the Introduction, That he can tru● appeal to God, that 'tis only a sincere love to Tru● hath prevailed upon him at this time, to off his thoughts about this Matter; and he hearty desires that herein he may be guided by the Wo● and Spirit of God. pag. 2, 3.  
And in the Epistle Dedicatory, he acquaints t● Members of that Church of Christ, to which he ● most immediately related, That he lays befog them, what he judges to be the Counsel of G● in this Matter; and as to the Fundamental Pro● of Conjoint Singing with many Voices together which he calls a Religious Practice, and where● he expects the acquiescence of their Judgement and Consciences, he therein depends only up● the Authority of God's Word, and Sound Arguments deduced from thence. And I have so mu● Charity to hope, that he is sincere in his Appe● and writes what he apprehends to be true. B● as he acknowledges in the beginning of his Int●duction, That the best here know but in pa● and that different Sentiments, even in Religion Concerns, are every where found among so● of the wisest and most serious Christians. Pa● 1. So I the less wonder, that he himself shou● in this Controversy pursue a Shadow instead of t● Substance, and wander in a dark and crooked Pat● who had a clear and straight one to walk in. B● thus it hath fallen out, through a Mistake of the Poi● he hath endeavoured to manage, and the Opini● by him defended hath proved a strengthening of ● Opposers, and still lies under the heavy Charge● being a groundless and superstitious Innovation.  

CHAP. I. Wherein R. A's. first way of proving Singing of Psalms a Christian Duty, viz. From its 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 its 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 sing, lay great stress upon the Morality of their Practice; I have often heard it urged 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 mere 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 mere positive Duties, as being such as have no intrinsic Goodness in them, but derive all their Virtue 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 considered both in his Innocential and Lapsed Estate; and so Nature itself 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 shows wherein this consisted; Namely, In Knowledge, Righteousness and Holiness, Col. 3.10. Eph. 4.24. From the comparing of which Scriptures, it plainly appears, 'twas God himself, and not Nature, that ensculpt 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 'tis 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 asked 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, 'tis a Relic 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, etc. Tom. 6. Com. in Eph. p. 82.  he, and 
‖ Baptist's Confess. of Faith, Chap. 6. Sect. 2, 4. Westminster Confess. 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 inclined to all Evil. If Man lost all Spiritual Life, Light and Power, by the Fall, then 'tis impossible in that Estate, he should have any such Relic 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, than the Objection vanisheth; but if that Corrupt and Depraved Nature we derive from Old Adam, then 'tis 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 Pools Synopsis Criticorum, do understand by Nature, that which is per Gratiam reparata, repaired or restored by Grace.  
From whence 'tis evident, whether we consider Man before, or after the Fall, neither the Law of God itself, 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 mere 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 discerned 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. mere Positive Duties, such as Baptism and the Lords-Supper, which have no real intrinsic 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 discernible 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 Stoics, Platonists and Peripatetics, 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 Virtue, 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 Virtue in general, the Offices of it, and the measures of Practice conform thereunto? If Attention and Consideration would have directed them in those Inquiries, 'tis 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 Judgement) 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 'tis demonstrable from his Hypothesis, who divides Religious Duties into Moral and merely Positive, that neither of these  can be merely positive, but must of necessity have something Moral; because they have an intrinsic Goodness in them, and flow from that relation we have to Christ as Creatures; for he is our Creator, no less than our Mediator; 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, than it will follow, that the contrary Vices are discernible by the same way: For that which directeth Men to the Knowledge and Practice of Virtue, 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, quàm 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 killed 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, expressly allows of Revenge in case of Injury: And commends 
† Nonnunquaem mortem sibi ipsi consciscere alius debet, Catoni autem, etc. moriendum potius quàm 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.  
'Twere easy 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 show 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 'tis 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 quàm Dijs, quanto majus beneficium est bona Vita, quam Vita. Epist. 90.  Seneca, is from God; but that which is greater than Life, our Virtue, is from Philosophy. Therefore we own so much the more to Philosophy, than we do to God; by how much Virtue 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 Virtuous. These were Men of great Attention and Consideration; but while they scorned to acknowledge Moral Virtue 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 'tis 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 its 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 its Grave.  
Sect. 3. From the Explication of his Thesis, viz. That Singing the Praises of God, is not a mere 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 'tis a moral Duty for Men to praise God, with all the Faculties wherewith he has endowed them. To 
† 1 Cor. 6.19, 20.  glorify 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 glorify 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 glorify God from a pure Evangelical Principle; Christ hath given himself a Ransom for Soul and Body, and therefore with both ye are obliged to glorify him.  
And what is this to Singing? Yes, saith R. A. 'Tis certain that Men have not only a Faculty to praise God in their Hearts, by an inward acknowledgement of his Goodness and Excellency, but also with their Mouths; and this not only by Speaking, but also by Singing his Praise.  
Answ. 'Tis certain all Men ought to praise God with all the Faculties of their Souls; but 'tis not certain that all Men have a Faculty 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 its true Origination imports, Facilitas agendi, (saith Calep.) an Easiness to do a thing. For if he takes it in the first Sense, then 'tis essential to the Soul, and aught 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 'tis 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 passed 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, than those who are not of his Opinion in this matter, have either wilfully rejected that Guide, or are Metamorphosed into Irrational Being's; either of which would be too uncharitale to suppose, seeing those who descent 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 performed to him by the Heavenly Angels, at the Discovery of his Glorious Perfections in the Creation. Which I think evidently shows 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 o● the 
* Camero. Praelect. Tom. 2. p. 440, 441.  Schoolmen be true, tha● Angelical Being's express their Minds to one another, Sola Voluntate, by the Will ●y, then how can they be said to Sing in a Vocal ●anner? When Angels have appeared, and spoke ● Men in assumed Bodies, for the Execution of at present Service Almighty God was pleased to ●ploy them in, they spoke by the Mediation and ●nistry of the Organs of those assumed Bodies: But ●gels considered merely as Spirits, have no Instru●nts for the sensible and orderly Articulation of ●●nds, which is properly 
* Note the Speech here spoken of, is that which Philosophers term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Speech uttered or pronounced.  Ex●nal Speech; and consequently ●nnot modulate the Outward ●ice without assumed Bodies; ●ause such an Action is proper a Rational Agent, acting by ● Ministry of Corporeal Organs.  
Thirdly, 'Tis not evident to me, that an Ex●ple of the Angels, as such, is a sufficient Ground ● the Foundation of a Moral Duty to Men. For ● Glorious and High-exalted Station they are in, ● the different Administration they and we are ●er, make it improbable, that they should be ●ule or Standard for our Obedience: Jesus Christ ● Head of his Church, having not taken upon ● the Nature of Angels, but the Seed of Abraham; ● any where referred us to them, but to him● for Direction, in all the parts of Duty: herefore saith Christ, 
† Mat. 4.19. and John 1.43.  Follows ● and the Apostle called ●n the Corinthians, to be 
‖ 1 Cor. 11.1.  ●owers of him, as he was of Christ. ●e Heavenly Angels are Glorious Creatures, Mitring Spirits to the Heirs of Salvation, and ex●te the Will of God in Perfection. But as ex●ent Being's as they are, 'tis not said in the Ho● Scriptures; Be ye holy, for the Angels are holy: ●, Be ye perfect, as the Angels are perfect: But, 
* Levit. 11.44. and 1 Pet. 1.16.  be ye holy, saith the Lo● for I am holy; and 
† Mat. 5.48.  be ye perfe● saith Christ, even as your Fat● which is in Heaven is perfect. ● aught all to Pray, that the Will of God may ● done in Earth, as it is in Heaven: But how ● the Angels, of whom there is no Evidence, nor much as Probability of their Singing Vocally in H●ven, be a Rule or Precedent of such a Practice h● below? This is a dark Region our Souls are now ● and we know but very little of the State and Employment of the Heavenly Angels; that they ● Glorious Spirits, and do continually Adore ● Magnify God, the Holy Scriptures inform us; ● that they praise him by Vocal Singing, the Sac● Records are not only silent, but 'tis also W● incompetent to Spirits, as such, who are Incor● real Being's, and so incapable through the Defect proper external Organs, of a Vocal Celebration of Adorable Perfections. In a word, the Celestial An● are pure Intellectual Substances, separated from Matter, and therefore cannot be supposed to S● in R. A's. Sense, that is, with the External Voice  
But he proceeds to prove the Point asserted, ● the Reader may see that he has Ground for w● he says; his Proof is, That the Angels did ● praise God by singing, he himself testifies, Job 7. When the Morning Stars sang together, and the ● of God shouted for joy. That by the Morning S● here, can't be meant the Material Stars in ● Firmament, to me seems plain, in that they ● at his laying the Foundat● of the Earth, which 
* Gen. 1.1.  wa● the first day of the Creat● whereas the Material S● were not made till th● fourth day. 
† Ver. 19  And theref● by the Morning Stars we are to understand ● 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 ● 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; ●eading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Stars simply, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Angels, or the Sons of God. So 
(a) Synop. Critic.  Mercer, Lyra, Meno●bius, Tirinus, Cartwright, and sundry other Learned Men, do not take the Morning Stars figuratively, but properly. 
(b) Crit. Sacr. ubi supra  Drusius explains ●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 ●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 Cranmers Preface to them, render it, Wh●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 Creator 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. th● Lord is pleased himself to answer Job out of th● Whirlwind, Chap. 38.1. Who is this that darkneth Counsel, by words without knowledge? v. 2. that seek● to justify himself, and misrepresent the Wisdom and Justice of my Proceed. Gird up now thy Loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer 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 joining together thos● things, which are and aught 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 shouted for Joy?  
Now let us come to the Trial 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 ●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. 'Tis a mere Begging of the Question; for deny the Morning Stars, (which I apprehend to be Material Stars, and not the Holy Angels) Sang at ●od's laying the Foundations of the Earth, which he ●akes for granted, and demand of him better Proof: ●or the Hebrew Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ranan, doth not necessarily ●fer that Signification here; Singing not being its primary 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, ar● not the Material Stars in the Firmament, but th● Holy Angels.  
2. That the Angels were created on the Firs● 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 als● a 
* Andrew's Sermon on 1 Cor. 11.16.  Wring of the Scriptures, estrain that out of them which 〈◊〉 not in them. The Third, If Angels are to be understood by the Sons of God, 〈◊〉 confuted by the Text, which says, The Sons of G● Shouted, not Sang; and all know, Shouting is a different Sound or Noise from that of Vocal Singing.  
As to the Second, I desire him to read an Auth●cited by him, p. 79, 112. in Favour of Rythmical Singing. 
† Edward's Excel. and Perfect. of the H. Scriptures, Vol. 3. cap. 7. p. 324.  So● (saith he) refer the Creati● of Angels to this first da● work, by reducing them the word Heaven in the first Verse, but th● verse is a general Account of the whole Cr●tion, and not of any particular days production (or else by Heaven and Earth there is meant ● first matter, or rude Draught of both) the fore no such thing can be inferred thence. N● are we to think, that the Angelic Order comprehended under Light, (as I find some engine, because they read of An Angel of Lig●● 2 Cor. 11.14.) for it is material Light only t● is the product of the first days work. I ●ther think, that Moses designed not to incle Angels in any part of that Account, which gives of the Creation; for he makes it his ●siness to speak of those Works of God which were Visible and Sensible; and therefore 'tis no wonder that the Angelic Spirits are not mentioned, for they come not within the Compass of his Undertaking.  
Sect. 5. The Third Consideration he brings to ●rove Singing the Praises of God to be a Moral ●uty is, that  
" Whatsoever was practised 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. ●ssay, p. 10.  
Answ. I suppose he means, whatsoever was practised in the Assemblies of the People of God, ● a Part of his Worship, and approved by ●●m; that is, Commanded or Instituted by him, afore the Promulgation of the Decalogue, and ●ver afterward declared to be Typical, is a ●oral Duty; or else this Assertion may be justly ●cepted against. For all Uncommanded Worship ● forbidden, and therefore Unlawful Worship. ●either can any thing be properly a Moral Duty, ● be performed in the Church of God, as a Part ● his Worship, which hath not the Stamp of Di●ne Authority upon it. For the Agreeableness of Practice to (that which is called) Right Rea●●n, or the Light of Nature, is no sufficient Ground ● a Church Observation, except it be also com●nded by God. I do not in the least Question, but ●● the True Church of God in all Ages, was guid●● by his Holy Spirit in the Worship they performed, and he accepted; or else I know not how ●●y could be the True Church, or perform acceptable Service to him. For the True Church hath ●●d Christ all along for its Head of Government and Influence; to suppose it at any Time to be wit● out him for its Legislator and Guide, were to ma●● it cease it's very Being. For the Being of the Tr●● Church consists in its Union with, and special Relation to Christ, as its Head. And for the Service which it performs to God, they must be of his Preparing, and not the Issues of our own Priva●● Studies and Contrivances. F●● 
* Reynold's on Hos. 14.1, 2.  nothing can go to God, i. ● meet with Acceptance at h●● Hands, but what first com● from him.  
From whence it doth apparently follow, th● whatsoever was practised in the True Church of Go● and approved by him, as a Part of his Worship, eve● before the Giving the Sinai Law, had his Command for it; because it could not otherwise be acceptab●● Worship to him: For he accepts of none, but wha● he has Appointed.  
To this it may perhaps be Objected, that befo●● the Giving of the Law at Mount Sinai, there wa● no written Law, and so no Command for th● Church's Direction in Worship: But Moral Duties of Religion were written in men's Hearts b● Nature, and by serious Attention thereunto the could discern what they were, without any speci●● Revelation, and so perform true and acceptab●● Worship to Almighty God.  
Answ. This Objection is in part answered already where I have shown, that Moral Duties of Religion are not written in men's Hearts by Nature, b●● by the God of Nature; and that serious Attention alone is Morally Impossible to make the great Discoveries, which are attributed to it; for Man● Natural Condition in the Fa●● being as the Holy Scriptures declare, 
† Acts 26.18. Eph. 5.8. Col. 1.13. 1 Thes. 5.5.  Darkness; how is ● possible for him to see his M●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 not 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 Man's Redemption, and thereupon was our Lord Redeemer, gave even to Socrates, Plato, Cicero, Seneca, Antonine, Epictetus, Plutarch, etc. 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 passed from one to another by Oral Tradition) Six whereof were first given to the Sons of Adam, and the Seventh superadded to the Sons of Noah, and altogether by the Rabbins styled 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.  Critic.  
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 Judgement, or Administration of Justice.  
4. The Fourth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of disclosing Nakedness, that is, of Abstaining from all Uncleanness, and interdicted Marriages within those Degrees which are set down Leu. 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 chief directed in Matters of Worship by mere 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 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 show of Probability with them.  
1. 'Tis 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 performed, yet a Miraculous Action is no Safe Ground to build a Moral Duty upon.  
2. 'Tis not probable they had all Learned to Sin● in an Ordinary Way, for if so; then there mu●● have been some Body to Learn from, and that either while they were in Egypt, or between their coming out thence and immediate Arrival on the oth●● side the Red-Sea. But neither of these can we be supposed, if we consider, either the total Silenc● of Moses about any such Instructers, or the afflicte● State of that People in Egyp● who 
* Exod. 6.5, 9  groaned for Anguish of Sp●rit under the 
† Exod. 5.6,— 19  Cruel Tyranny 〈◊〉 Pharaoh, and his Taskmasters A very unlikely time to learn Artificial Singing in Or, their Murmuring at Pihahiroth, when they we●● in Fear of being cut off by Ph●raoh, and said unto Moses, 
‖ Exod. 14.11.  B●cause there were no Graves in Egyp● hast thou taken us away to die in the Wilderness Or, the little Time after for Learning it between Pihahiroth, and the other side the Red-Sea.  
3. There is as little Probability they should a●● be naturally qualified for Harmonious Vocal Singing. For Experience tells us, tho' there is a nat●tural Aptitude in some to it, yet others are wholly inept thereunto, and can never attain to it all the●● Days.  
Secondly, Nothing can be gathered certainly fro● 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 i● the Perfect Tense, is a 
* Vatab. & Grot. in Syn. Crit.  F●ture in Hiphil: And therefore 
† Lex. Heb. Lat. p. 197.  Leusden renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Jashir● They shall sing, in the Future, and not in th● Perfect Tense; as 'tis also rendered, Psal. 65.14 Heb. and 138.5. So that the true Reading according to the Original, is, [Than shall Mo●●s Sing,] and not [Then Sang Moses.] And ●●uly it puts me at a Stand to consider, that the ●●me Verb, and of the same Future, should be either ●●e Future or Preterperfect Tense, as Translators ●●ease. For they have here rendered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Jashir, ●●ng, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ashira, I will Sing. The one in ●●e Future, and the other in the Preterperfect Tense, ●●d yet both Future's in Hiphil.  
But in Answer to this, 
* Crit. Sacr.  ●●me tell us from Abenezra, ●●at the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Az, joined with a Verb of ●●e Future Tense, hath in the Arabic Tongue ●peculiar Property: Namely, to convert its Signification into the Preterperfect, which the Hebrews ●●so sometimes observe, as in Deut. 4.41. Jos. ●. 12.  
To which I reply, I see no absolute Necessity of ●●ceding from the Future Signification in those Pla●●s; and besides, the last is so rendered by Pagnine. have also taken Notice, that in other Places, where ●●at Particle is joined with a Verb of the Future ●ense, as Psal. 2.5. and 51.21. Heb. the Verb is ●●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 together, any more than that The three Thousand, Acts 〈◊〉 42. or The five Thousand, Acts 4.24, 31. Prayed ●●cally together. 'Tis said of the Three Thousand, ●●at They continued steadfastly in the Apostles Doctrine, ●●d Fellowship, and in breaking of Bread and in Pray●●; and of the other, that They lifted up their Voice 〈◊〉 God with one Accord. And yet surely there was no conjunction of External Voices in these Solemn Acts, ●●ey did not all Pray Vocally at once; but an Unity of ●eart and Spirit in the whole, One whereof pray●● 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 joined 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 Father's 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 ar● these, Nor will it follow from this Argument (as may be objected) that praising God b● Musical Instruments is also a Moral Duty, seein● they are also mentioned in the same Chapter v. 20. For this doth not appear as Singing doe● to be the practice of the Church as such. Essay p. 10, 11.  
Answ. Whether he intends by Singing, that, tha● 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 mere Positive Duty, which he hath not yet done; or it will unavoidably follow, that Praising of God by Instrumental Music 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 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 its 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; than it is not Typical, but according to his Conclusion it must be Moral; and if so, then 'tis 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 merely 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 merely 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 mere 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 merely Moral, according to R. A's. Sense of the Word; or Typical, but wholly of Supernatural Extraction.  
Again, Because He is so positive, that no Exception can be made against this Assertion, viz. That whatsoever was practised 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 practised 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, than 'twill follow, that the Admission of Infants into Church-membership was a Moral Duty; and if so, than it ought 〈◊〉 be practised now; and consequent●● both he, and the five 
* Jos. Masters, William Collins, Joseph Stennett, John Piggott, Tho. Harrison.  Brethren who subscribed two Commendatory outfaces; One to his Essay, and Another to his Vindication and Appendix) ●●ve given away the Cause of An●adobaptism, (which hath been, and is so strenuously contended for) and put an Unanswerable Ar●●ment into the Hands of those, who argue for the ●●ght of Infants to Water-baptism, and Visible church-membership in Gospel-days.  
And here I cannot but think it both necessary and ●●asonable, to remark briefly upon ●●●s Notion of the 
† Essay, p. 8, 14, 40.  Universal ●●d Immutable Obligation of a Mo●● Duty, without making any Exception, till he ●●mes to page 106. (where he tells us of the Old ●●stinction, between the Obligation of Affirmative ●●d Negative Precepts of the Moral Law; In that 〈◊〉 latter not only bind always, but also to all times; ●●●reas the Former, tho' they bind always, yet not to 〈◊〉 Times.)" But if God can alter the Law of Nature, and disannul 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, ●●th 
‖ Dust. Dubit. l. 2. c. 1. r. 1. n. 49. p. 181.  Jer. Taylor, one Way ●or other) than the Duty a●●ng from the Law can oblige 〈◊〉 longer, than the Law itself obligeth. For the ●●w of Nature hath in several Instances, respect to ●●rticular States, and so becomes in those Instances, changeable, as the States themselves. Whereupon the * Casuist before cited, 
Ibid.  condemns Grotius of an Unwary Expres●●●, in saying, that God cannot change the Law of Nature: For as Paul said of the Priesthood, being changed, there must of necessity be a change of the Law: So it is in the Law of Nature; Matter of it being changed, there must of Nece●ty also be a Change of the Law.  
This may seem New, and indeed is Unus● in the manner of speaking, but the Case is E●dent and Empirically certain: For when ● commanded Abraham to kill his Son; the Israe● to rob the Egyptians, and to run away with th● Goods, he gave them a Command to break Instance of the Natural Law, and he made necessary that Cain should marry with his Sist● and all those Laws of Nature, which did s●pose Liberty and Indistinction of Possessions, ● wholly altered, when Dominion and Servitu● and Propriety came into the World. Tay● Ibid. n. 48.  
Of the same Mind is Tho● Aquinas, who 
* Sum. Theol. 12 ae. q. 94. Art. 5.  saith, T● Law of Nature may be ch●ged two Ways.  
1. By Adding something to it, profitable Humane Life, which it did not primarily squire.  
2. By Substracting from it, in some particular ●stances, whereby the Obligation ceaseth, as to th● Instances, for certain special Reasons imped● the Observation.  
Sect. 9 His Fourth Consideration, whereby endeavours to prove Singing the Praises of ● a Moral Duty, is,  
Whatsoever is enjoined upon all Men, of Nations, is a Moral Duty. Essay, p. 11.  
Answ. This Position being laid down, with● any Limitation or Exception, I deny for th● two Reasons:  
1. Because there are some Duties of Universal ●unction upon Mankind, which I have 
* Chap. 1. Sect. 8. p. 32.  shown before, are of a addle Nature between Moral ●d Typical: One Instance is, about Loving our ●mies, Blessing them that curse us, etc. which are Typical, for they have no Antitype, nor meer-Positive, for they are Intrinsically good: Nor ●●ly, merely Moral; for tho' they contain that ●ch is Moral in them, yet they are not written men's Hearts by Nature; for Depraved Nature wholly bend the contrary way; Men naturally ●cluding it highly reasonable, To repel Force by ●ce, and to take Revenge upon their Enemies.  
●. Because there are some other Duties, which acknowledgeth to be merely Positive; and yet, ●ppose, he thinks they are enjoined upon all ●, of all Nations: For tho' he is pleased to ask Question," Where do we ever find Circumcision, ● any other mere Positive and Ceremonial Duty ●us enjoined? He might have answered it him● if he had not Industriously or Inadvertently ●ted it. For tho' Circum●n was a 
† Gen. 17.10, 11, 12, 13. Exod. 12.48.  Limited, and temporary Rite; yet I con●e he hath other Thoughts ●hese two Positive Duties, 
‖ Acts 15.10, 24. Gal. 5.2.  ● Baptism and the Lord's Supper; Essay, p. 6. if he believes them to be Ordinances remained Force, he cannot tell how to avoid the Unicity of their Injunction.  
●aving given my Reasons for denying his Posi● I proceed now to an Examination of Psal. ●. 100.1, 2. & 47.7. Texts cited by him, ●ove," That Singing the Praises of God is joined upon all Men, of all Nations. All ●th are so clearly and fully spoken to by Russel, in his Brief Animadversions upon R. A's. Essay, p. 35, 36, 37. that R. A. seeming to be a Loss for a solid Reply, charges the Learned A●madverter, with an Endeavo 
* Brief Vindication, p. 23.  to evade the Force of t● Texts alleged, by restra●ing those general Expression to the Israelites only; and then leaves the Is● to the Judgement of the Indifferent Reader.  
And I must confess, that W. R's. Exposition those Texts, hath given me so much Satisfacti● that had I seen it before my own thoughts w● digested into an Answer, I should have superse● much of the following Meditations.  
1. The first Text R. A. brings for his purpose is, Psal. 98.4. Make a joyful Noise unto the Lo● all the Earth; make a loud noise, and rejoice, and ● praise.  
Answ. If by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Col-Haaretz, All ● Earth, we are to understand, All Men of all ●tions, and that Indefinitely; I do not see  
1. How this Interpretation can consist with Practice of the Jewish Church; for we find ● David appointed a particular Number and O● of Men for Song in the House of the Lord. ● having computed the Number of the Levites, (f● the Age of thirty years and upward) which mounted to thirty and eight thousand; of th● Twenty and four Thousand were to set forward Work of the House of the Lord, and six thousand ● Officers and Judges. Moreover, four thousand were ●ters, and four thousand praised the Lord with th●●struments, which I made (saith David) to p● therewith, 1 Chron. 23.4, 5. and it doth not pear, that either he himself, or any else, but t● who were particularly appointed thereunto, ● Vocally or Instrumentally, in the Public Asbly.  
2. If this Phrase, All the Earth, intent, All ● of all Nations, indefinitely, than the Wicked are the Subjects of Divine Praises, as well as the Godly; but this is inconsistent with the Nature of God, and the Duty to be performed to him: He is an Holy God, and the Duty an Holy Duty, and therefore a Wicked Man or Woman cannot perform ●t aright.  
In Psal. 149. we read, that The praise of God is ●n the Congregation of Saints, v 1. that The Children ●f Zion are the proper Subjects of Praise, v. 2, 3. ●hat The Lord taketh pleasure in his people, v. 4. And ●s high praises are in their Mouths, v. 6. and in Psal. ●3. the Righteous are exhorted, to Rejoice in the Lord, for praise is comely for the upright, v. 1. and ●hey Offer up spiritual Sacrifices, acceptable to God by ●esus Christ, 1 Pet. 2.5. For the Eyes of the Lord ●re over the righteous, and his Ears are open to their ●rayers, 3.12. But the Case is otherwise with the ●ngodly, for being Enemies by wicked Works, Col. ●. 21. and Dead in their Trespasses and Sins, and ● Nature Children of Wrath, Eph. 2.1, 3. How can ●ch as these be said to celebrate the Praises of ●od, who live a Life of Alienation from him? ●nd whose Sacrifices are so far from Acceptance, ●at God declares they are, An Abomination to ●im, Prov. 15.8. Their Praises he rejects as Dung, ●nd looks upon their most seemingly Solemn Services, as the Cutting off a Dog's Neck, the Offering of ●ines-Blood, and the Blessing of an Idol, Isa. 66.3. ●or unto the Wicked God saith, what hast thou to do ● declare my Statutes, or that thou shouldst take my ●ovenant into thy Mouth? Seeing thou hatest Instruction, and castest my Words behind thee, Psal. 50. ●6, 17. Peter saith, The Face ● or 
* Knatchbul's Animad. vers. in Acts 3.18, 19, 20, 21.  Anger) of the Lord, as ●e Word sometimes signifies, ● against them that do evil, 1 Ep. ●. 3. ver, 12. But if we are to understand by All the Earth, the Good or Righteous only, who are Go● Royal Priesthood, to offer up Spiritual Sacrifices him acceptable by Jesus Christ; then the force of A's. Position will be utterly enervated, unless a Pa● be equal to the Whole, and of the same Latitude and Extent. 'Tis impossible that that should enjoined upon all Men, of all Nations, which y● is enjoined but upon some; and those only, w● are specially moved thereunto by the Holy Spir●● according to the Order set down by the Apost●●● 1 Cor. 14.  
And then for Singing with the Outward Voi● this Text (Psal. 98.4.) doth no more enjoin upon all Men, of all Nations, than it doth Instrumental Music, such as the Harp, Trumpets, a Cornet, which are mentioned in the 5th. and 6th. verses following: For the Phrase, All the Earth, expressed in the 4th. verse, is not confined to that, b● hath a necessary Connexion with, and Relation to t● two immediately subsequent Verses also. And I should leave this Text, but that it may be needful to remind R. A. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Vezammeru, rendered, Sing Praise, is translate by the Septuagint, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and Hierom, Tremellius and Juni● Psallite; which word 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est proprie Fidibus canere, Crit. Sacr. in Jac. 5.13.  Grot● says, properly signifies Fidi● canere, i. e. To play upon t● Harp or Lute, as 
† 
Thesau. Ling. Rom. & Brit.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, proprié leviter chordas & nervum tango, sive arcûs intendendi causâ, sive sonûs Mufici excitandi. Josua Barnes in Euripidis Jon. v. 173.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, manu arcuum pulsant nervos. Euripidis Bacchaes, v. 782, 783.   Cooper e●pounds the Phrase out of Qui●tilian. And 
‖ Calep. in verbo Psallo.  Budaeus interpr● that of Gellius, Et Qui ps●lerent, by Citharam pulsare● They played upon the Harp. 〈◊〉 are Horace, 2 Epist. 1. and C●cero in Catil. taken by 
(a) Ibid.  C●lepine to understand Psallimus a● Psallere. The primary Signification then of the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin Word, is such a Singing as is performed by the Harp, Lute, or some such Musical Instrument; and ●hen it is used to Sing with the Voice, than it must be understood secondarily, and improperly; for the proper Meaning of it is, to play upon a Musical Instrument, as before is declared. So that whether we consider the Extent of the Injunction, (Psal. 98.4.) or the primary and proper Signification of the Word, I cannot see any Advantage accrueing to the Opinion endeavoured to be supported from thence.  
2. The next Place is Psal. 100.1, 2. Make a ●oyful Noise unto the Lord, all ye Lands, serve the Lord with gladness, come before his Presence with sing●●g; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Col-Haaretz, All ye Lands, or, All ●he Earth, hath been spoken to before. Make joyful Noise, Heb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hariu, is rendered by Hierom, Jubilate; by Tremellius and Junius, Clan●ite, Sound a Trumpet, alluding to the Custom ●f the Priests on the Day of Jubilee, who then ●ounded Trumpets or Ramshorns. But this not ●eing the Word he insists upon, let us see what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Birnanah, translated with Singing will do. The Septuagint have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hierom in Ex●ratione, Montanus in Ovatione, in Exultation and Triumph, which doth not necessarily imply sing●g; because we may rejoice in, or before the Lord, without a Musical Voice. The Root is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ranan, ●nd in Piel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rinnen, He cried aloud; in ●hich Sense the Substantive is used in Psal. 17.1. 8.2. 106.44. 119.169. & 142.6. and rendered ●ry by our Translators. In 1 Kings 22.36. It is translated Proclamation, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Vaijaabor Harinna, & transivit Clamour, (saith 
* Lenic. Heb.  Buxtorf) and there went a Proclamation, according to our Bibles, Therefore tho' it is applied to Vocal Singing, yet that is by a Metonymy; the most proper Signification being to Cry aloud, which may be do without Melodious Tuning of the Voice.  
3. His Third and last Text, and on which seems to lay the greatest Stress, is Psalm 47.7. whe● from this General Reason, that God is the King all the Earth, (and not of Judea only) he say 'tis required that every one that hath Understanding should sing Praises to him, Page 1▪ But this Text will do him no more Service th● the former, for here the Word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Zamm●ru again; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Septuagint Psallite, Hierom, T●mellius and Junius, Play upon the Harp or Lut● and not primarily to sing with the Voice, as ha' been already manifested. But if we should grant, th● Singing with the Voice is here intended, against whi●● there is a stronger Probability than for it, yet t●● general Reason alleged, can possibly infer no more than an Injunction upon some, Namely, the Saints; f● the Wicked neither can, nor have they (remaini● such) any thing to do to Speak or Sing the Praise of God, as Acts of Spiritual Worship; for t●● Children of Zion, as was said before, are the prop● Subjects of Divine Praises. Yea, the general Re●son that God is the King of all the Earth, as hath an Aspect upon Gospel days, where the who Worship of God is to be resolved into the in● mediate Authority of Christ, must be interpret●● by and regulated according to that Authority. An● how, and with what Ceremonies soever Singin● was performed under the Old-Testament-Dispenstion, when many Carnal Ordinances were in u●till the Times of Reformation; yet now we a● to eye, both in the Discharge of that and all oth● parts of Worship, the Sovereign Appointment an● Direction of Jesus Christ. But more of this who we come to R. A's. New-Testament Proofs fo● Common Singing, which shall be spoken to as the ye in the way.  
Sect. 10. His Fifth Consideration, to prove Singing the Praises of God a Moral Duty, is,  
Whatever is preferred before the most Excellent Parts of Ceremonial Worship, as more pleasing to God, is a Moral Duty. Thus to know God, and to love him above all; to love our Neighbour as ourselves; to do Justice and Judgement, to be merciful to the miserable: These Duties are preferred before the most 
* Prov. 21.3. Mar. 12.33. Hos. 6.6.  Excellent Sacrifices, which were the chief Parts of the Ceremonial Worship. And why? But because the former are Moral Duties, and good in themselves, whereas the latter were only Positive Duties, and good because commanded. And that singing to the Praise of God is a Duty of the same Nature with the former of these, I conclude, because 'tis, like the, preferred before the most Excellent Sacrifices, as being more pleasing to God. Thus the 
† Psal. 69.30, 31.  Psalmist tells us, That to Sing to the Praise of God, or (which is the same) to Praise him with a Song, is more pleasing to him than (to Sacrifice) an Ox or a Bullock. Essay, p. 12, 13.  
Answ. In this Paragraph we are told,  
1. That whatever is preferred before the most Excellent Parts of Ceremonial Worship, as more pleasing to God, is a Moral Duty.  
2. The Reason, why Moral Duties are thus preferred, as more pleasing to God; because they are good in themselves.  
3. That Singing to the Praise of God is such a Moral Duty, and so preferred as more pleasing to God.  
The First is not universally true, because there are some Duties which are preferred before the chiefest Parts of Ceremonial Worship, as more pleasing to God, and yet are not Moral in R. A's. Sense, i. e. Moral by Nature. There are some Heroical Acts of Charity, (saith 
* Taylor's Ductor Dubit. l. 2. c. 2. r. 6. n. 77. p. 283.  one) commanded by Christ, the Observation of which, tho' it be not Moral, or of prime Natural Necessity; yet because they are commanded by Christ, whose Law is to oblige us as long as the Sun and Moon endure; to us Christians, and to all to whom the Notice of them does arrive; it is all one in respect of our Duty, and hath no real difference in the Event of things.  
Secondly, I cannot approve of the Reason R. A. gives, for the Preference of Moral Duties, to the most Excellent Parts of Ceremonial Worship, and as being more pleasing to God, viz. because they are good in themselves; for than their Intrinsic Goodness will be the Formal Reason of their Acceptance with God, which cannot but sound harsh in the Ears of Humble Believers, who look upon their best Duties, in and of themselves, to have no such Goodness or Worthiness, as to recommend them to the Divine Acceptance. For both we and our Duties are accepted, in and for Christ alone, and upon no other Account whatsoever: First our Persons, and then our Performances; but not as done in our own Strength, or as having a Natural or Moral Bonity in them, to render them more pleasing unto God; but as issuing from, and wrought by the Spirit of Christ in us, who alone makes them acceptable.  
If Moral Duties, because of their Intrinsic Goodness, are more pleasing than those that are positive, than that Intrinsic Goodness is some way or other Meritorious; either in respect of Co-meetness or Co-worthiness; for else why should God be more pleased with them than with the other? but because he sees in them something that is more suitable to, and worthy of himself than in the other. Which if admitted, would make the Acceptance of Moral Duties depend upon Duties, and not upon Christ. The Texts cited in the Margin, Prov. 21.33. Mar. 12.33. Hos. 6.6. are not so much to his purpose, as they seem to be. For tho' Justice and Judgement, and the loving of God above all, and our Neighbour as ourselves, and being merciful to the miserable, are more pleasing to God than all Sacrifices and Burnt-Offerings; as Samuel told Saul, To obey is better than Sacrifice, and to he arken than the fat of Rams, 1 Sam. 15.22. yet these Duties do not recommend themselves to God by their own Intrinsic Goodness, and so become more pleasing to him than Sacrifices; but 'tis the Goodness of God through Faith in Jesus Christ, who by his Spirit alone, enable; us to perform, that which is wellpleasing in his Sight.  
To the Third, That Singing to the Praise of God is such a Moral Duty, and preferred before the most Excellent Sacrifices, as more pleasing to God.  
I Answer, It is one thing to Praise God, and another to praise him with a Song: And tho' Praising of God and sing are joined together in Psal. 69.30. yet the Preference mentioned v. 31. doth not respect Singing as a Moral Duty, but Praise and Thanksgiving (whereof Singing either with the Voice or Instruments, then in use, was only a Modal Concomitant) as will appear by considering the Text impartially, and comparing it with other Places: The Words are these, I will praise the Name of God with a Song, and will magnify him with Thanksgiving: This also shall please the Lord better than an Ox or Bullock, that hath horns and hoofs. The Antecedent here to this, (which is a Supplement, for 'tis not expressed in the Hebrew Text) is 
* And so Trem. and Junius understand it, who thus render the Words, Laudabo nomen Del cantico, & magnificabo eum gratiarum actione, quae melior videbitur, etc.  thanksgiving: For Singing is not of the Essence of Praise, for Praise may be performed acceptably without it. And therefore Singing is omitted, Psal. 50.14. Offer unto God Thanksgiving, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Todah, without any Musical Mixtures or Additions: By which Omission it appears, Songs, as such, were of no better Account with God than Sacrifices or Burnt-Offerings, which are there mentioned, as things he little regarded of themselves, tho' he had commanded them, and required the Performance of them. And in Amos 5.22, 23. God tells Israel by his Prophet, that he not only disregards their Offerings, but also bids them take away from him, the Noise of their Songs. Where the Word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Shirecha, from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Shur, the same Root, from whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Beshir, with a Song, Psal. 69.30. is derived.  
So that from the whole, I think we may reasonably infer this Conclusion, viz. That forasmuch as the Hebrew Word is the same in both places, and Songs are ranked in the same Class with Sacrifices, the chief Parts of Ceremonial Worship; Songs have no more of that which R. A. calls Moral in them, that is, Moral by Nature, (for so he is to be understood, if he be 
* Essay, p. 7.  consistent with himself) than the Jewish Sacrifices had.  
And tho' this Interpretation differ from that given by W. R. yet I cannot but think his 
† Brief Animadv. p. 39, 40.  Exposition worthy of our Serious Consideration. 'Tis charged by R. A. with 
‖ Brief Vindicat. p. 23, 24.  Novelty, as being an Exposition not to be met with among the Learned Pool's Collections, viz. that 'tis not Praising the Name of God with a Song, etc. which the Psalmist prefers to Sacrifices, but the Sacrifice of Christ. And with a Solecism, in making the Hebrew Word for 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Sacrifice, which is of the Masculine Gender, to agree with the 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Br. Vindicat. p. 24. Marg.  Verb here used of the Feminine Gender.  
As to the first Part of the Charge, if the Exposition be new, yet the Reply is no Solid Refutation of it; for what if it is not to be met with in Synopsis Criticorum? Is that Author the only standard to interpret Scripture by? The Sole Test of a true or false Exposition? His Collections I own are Learned and Elaborate, but as all is not Gold that is there, for he recites many strange Opinions of Commentators; so all is not to be rejected as Dross, which is not contained in those Volumes: Whatsoever Interpretation of Scripture is agreeable to the Scope of the Place, and conform to the Analogy of Faith, I think, stands upon Equal Ground with any Exposition in the Synopsis.  
And as to the Solecism, that's easily answered; for W. R. useth no Hebrew Word in all his Exposition of Psalm 69.30, 31. and therefore cannot be guilty of the false Concord laid to his Charge: But give me leave to put R. A. in remembrance, that tho' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Zebach, Sacrifice, be of the Masculine Gender, yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Zibcha, is of the Feminine, which signifies the same, Hosea 4.19. and would very well accord with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Vethitab, This also shall please, a Verb of the Feminine Gender; were not good English industriously turned into bad Hebrew. After which Rate, the Vindicator may make his Opponent write Solecisms when he pleases.  
Another Passage wherein R. A. is pleased to Criticise upon W. R. is in Brief Vindication, p. 10. Nor will his Raileries the more affect any, because written by a Mand-Doctor in Physic of the Famous University of Cambridge, or (as he elsewhere expresses it in his own peculiar Latin) by William Russel, Medicinae Doctor Academiae Cantabrigiensis.  
Answ. First, Methinks R. A. speaks too diminutively both of the Doctor, and of the University; for the Dr. must be acknowledged to be a Scholar, and the University Famous for Humane Literature: And therefore R. A. had done well to have omitted these Expressions, viz. A Mand-Doctor in Physic, Vindicat. p. 10. The Cambrige-Doctor, p. 45. Her Doctor, p. 17. This Master of Sense and Grammar, p. 28. Famous University of Cambridge, p. 10, 17, 34, 48. Our Authors own University, p. 20. and his Famous University, p. 24, 26. For being no University-Man himself, his often Repetition of those Epithets, and especially if the Mode of Expressing himself be observed, plainly intimates Diminution or Contempt.  
Secondly, Medicinae Doctor Academiae Cantabrigiensis, is not prefixed to the Book R. A. pretends to Answer; and therefore, tho' it was a Slip of the Pen in another Treatise, yet to me it seems to be inopportunely remembered here. However, an Enallage Casûs, Academiae Cantabrigiensis, for Ex Academiâ Cantabrigiensi, will easily mend it, and make it really, what he Ironically terms it, peculiar Latin. But since R. A. 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 Criticising Faculty upon. And that I may invite 
† Ibid. p. 26.  this Learned Critic to his pretty way of Criticising, 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 Schoolmaster, p. 66.   
Where 'tis utterly unaccountable, that the Nom. Quisque should be put without any Verb, among so many Obliqne Cases. And yet I observe, the same things are marked for Barbarisms in one Author, that pass for Elegancies in Another.  
'Tis 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 yesterday Acquiring; so his apparent Attempt to diminish the Doctor's, which I conceive is no way inferior 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 mere 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 shown 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 myself, 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 summed 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 Confess. 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 th● 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, etc. therefore,  
Singing the Praises of God, is not written in the Heart of Man by Nature.  
The Sequel of the Major is plain; for an ●ct proper to one Spiritually Quickened and Illuminated, and Extraordinarily Influenced, cannot ●e performed by One Dead, Dark, and without ●ch Extraordinary Influence. Now Singing the praises of God, considered as a Part of God's own Worship, is such an Act; and therefore if Man's natural Condition in the Fall be such, as is before described, Singing the Praises of God is not writ●en in his Heart by Nature.  
If the Minor be denied, not only the Texts and confession of Faith cited in the Margin, but the ●hole Current of Holy Scripture will abundantly ●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 performed to God, at the Discovery of his Glorious Perfections in the Creation;  
But the Heavenly Angels Sang not, at the Dis●very of God's Glorious Perfections in the Crea●on: Therefore,  
Singing is not the Duty of Reasonable Crea●res, as such, and consequently not a Moral Duty. The Substance of the Major is his own, and the ●inor is clearly proved, Job 38.7. where 'tis ex●esly said, The Sons of God, or Heavenly Angels, ●outed (not Sang) for Joy. But of this see more ●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 enjoined upon all Men of all Nations;  
But Singing the Praises of God is not enjoined 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 i● proved by this Argument:  
Whatsoever is morally impossible for all Men 〈◊〉 all Nations, is not enjoined upon all Men of a●● Nations;  
But Singing the Praises of God is morally impossible for all Men of all Nations:  
Therefore Singing the Praises of God is not enjoined upon all Men of all Nations.  
The Major is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, self-evident; for Go● doth not require Duty, where he doth not giv● 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 t● Sing, then Singing the Praises of God is moral impossible for all Men of all Nations;  
But all Men of all Nations have not a Faculty to Sing: Therefore, etc.  
I know of no Exception against the Consequen●● of the Major, and for the Proof of the Minor, refer the Enquirer to p. 15. of this Reply.  
Arg. 4. Whatsoever is ranked in the same Cla● with, and no more accounted of by God himself than Sacrifices, the chief Parts of Ceremoni●● Worship, is no Moral Duty;  
But Songs are so ranked, etc. Amos 5.22, 2● and therefore are not Moral Duties.  
Arg. 5. Whatsoever is founded upon Prime Re●son, such as appears so to all Discerning Person is a Moral Duty;  
But Singing the Praises of God is not founde● 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 Dust. 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 ●oof, (if it could be had) would accrue to his ●ause, lays the Groundwork of his Essay in the morality of Singing; which he conceives is so well ●●ed, that no contrary Attempts can shake it. Hear ●ow assuredly he speaks in the Close of his first ●●ction, not as One that has newly put on the ●●arness, but obtained the Victory! From these Considerations (saith he) laid together, I dou● not but 'tis clear (beyond all reasonable Exception) that singing the Praises of God is no le● than a Moral Duty, and therefore the Duty ● all Men, and consequently of every Christia●▪ But whether there be Cause for such a Triumphant Conclusion, I refer to the Arbitrement ● the Impartial and Judicious; and shall attend ● further Proof, which he fetches from the Example of Christ.  
R. A. gins his Second Section thus, I sha●● prove, that Singing to the Praise of God, is t● Duty of every Christian, from the Example ● Christ. That this was his Practice in Religion Worship, is recorded Mat. 26.30. Mar. 14. 2● Essay, p. 14.  
Sect. 1. Answ. The Example Christ (saith 
* Dippers Dipped, p. 41.  Featley) or Apostles, without a Precept, d● not necessarily bind the Church. ● have but one Great Example, 
† Ductor Dubit. l. 2. c. 2. r. 7. n. 33, 34, 35. p. 292.  (sai● * Taylor) Jesus Christ; who liv● in perfect Obedience to his Father, ● also give us perfect Instruction, how we should do too, in our Proportion.— In whatsoever he gave ● Commandment, in that only we are bound to imit him. And a little after, We are to look upon Ch● as imitable, just as his Life was measured by the La● he gave us. But R. A. is of another Opinion, shall be seen by and by. And as to what (he sait● is recorded Mat. 26.30. Mar. 14.26. to have be● 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 doubt except only in three kinds of Works, viz. his Miraculous Ones, which he did by a special Exertion of his Divine Power, wherein we can'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, etc. 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 ●efore his Supper, administering of it at Night, to ●welve Men only, and no Women, and after another Meal? I suppose, he will grant that some of these (if not all) were practised 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 'tis, 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 missed 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 thos● Exceptions; and yet do not, as I think, Bind ever● Christian. Let this then be received as a standing Rul● by all Christians, That not the Example alone, but th● Command of Christ accompanying his Example, is that only which obligeth the Saints to Imitation and Obedience.  
R. A. And that our Saviour's Singing Hymn with his Disciples, comes under either o● those three forementioned Exceptions, I can se● no Reason to imagine: And therefore thence conclude, that 'tis the Duty of every Christian according to his Example to sing, to the Prai● of God.  
Answ. But what falls not within the Sphere o● his Imagination, ought not to be the Rule of an●ther Man's Thoughts, or a Bar to his Liberty For Thoughts are free, (especially in Problematical Points, which are, as Augustine saith, Quaest●onum non Fidei, Matters of Controversy and not 〈◊〉 Faith) and some Men think truer and more regularly than others. He seems by his Sudden an● Peremptory Conclusion, to be (methinks) som● what Opinionative and Dogmatical; for he canno● but know, by the Acquaintance he seems to hav● with Authors, that many Learned Men are 〈◊〉 Opinion, that the Hymn sung by our Saviour (〈◊〉 he did Sing at all, which is hereafter to be enquired into) did peculiarly belong to the Jewish Pa●sover. And therefore in a Disputable Case, an● where the Hinge of the Controversy mainly tur● 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, touching the Original of the Sou● whether by Creation or Traduc●●on, who would not conclude 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 'tis the Duty of every Christian to Sing to the Praise of God; tho' 'tis 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 Passover, or was a New Hymn suitable to the New Solemnity;) nor to be admitted, that the Example of our Saviour without his Command requiring our Obedience, hath the Obligation of a Precept upon us: R. A. proceeds to answer Objections raised against his Deduction from Christ's Example.  
I know there are two Objections made against this Argument, that require some Answer.  
1. It is affirmed, that the Word Sung in the Original Text.  
2. That supposing our Saviour did indeed Sing, yet 'tis presumed, that the Hymn which he sang might appertain to the Jewish Passover; and so be no more Obligatory upon Christians, from the Example of Christ, than the Passoever itself.  
Object. 1. It is affirmed, that the Word Sung is not in the Original, but added by the Translators; and that consequently all that assert Singing from these and the like Scriptures, Deceive others, and do very ill in Justifying the Translators in Adding to the Word of God.  
Answ. A bold Presumption indeed! for any, and especially such as know not a Word of the Original Text, thus to arraign our Bibles: And such as (should it be believed) would leave all English Readers in perplexing Doubts, when they rea● the Mind of God in their Bibles; and when, in stead thereof they read the Additions of Men. An● for any to Print or Publish against their own Teachers and Brethren, such a heavy Charge as this is, o● being Deceivers of others in the Matters of God and Justifying Additions to his Word, every on● surely must needs look upon to be a very ras● and unchristian Practice. Essay, p. 15, 16.  
Sect. 2. Repl. His Answer to this Objection discovers some Disorder of Spirit, contrary to thos● Beautifying Graces of Charity, Meekness, and Mutual Forbearance, recommended by him in his Introduction, p. 2. Such Language as Bold Presumption, Heavy Charge, Very rash and unchristian Practice and what he adds p. 17. Bold and Groundless Presumption, hath nothing of Argument to convince the Judgement, or to reason any Sober Enquirer into a Favourable Opinion of himself, or his Undertaking: Perit judicium eum res transit in affectum▪ When the Passions have taken possession of an Opinion, they quickly turn the Judgement out of Doors.  
But why is the Affirming, that the Word Sun● is not in the Original, but added by the Translators, such a Bold Presumption? Is it not as Bold to affirm it is there, where at best it is but by his Conjecture? may not another take the same Liberty that R. A. does? Or will he walk at large, and put all others under Restraint? Oh! but 'tis a Bold Presumption for any, and especially suc● as know not a Word of the Original Text, thus to arraign our Bibles. But wherefore this Censorious Exclamation? Our English Bible's ar● only Translations of the Original, and not to b● received any further than they accord with the Hebrew and Greek. The 
* Sess. 4. de Edit. & Usu Sacr. Librorum.  Council of Trent hath made the Vulgar Latin Edition of the Bible, the only Authentic Text, and thereby (says 
* Du Moulin 's Novelty of Popery, p. 34.  one) Authorized a thousand Depravations of the true Original. And the said 
† Sess. 4. Ibid.  Council Decrees, That it be used in Public Lectures, Disputations, Sermons and Expositions, and that no one presume to reject it under any Pretence. And R. A. seems to imply no less in the behalf of our English Bibles, which neither Learned nor Unlearned may (it seems) arraign without the Gild of a Bold Presumption: And yet he himself so far acknowledges, That perhaps our Translation might in some Instances be mended, and made to express the Sense of the Original more clearly. Br. Animad. p. 26. But for my part, I see no danger at all in arraigning of them for their Errors, and correcting the same, concordant to the Hebrew and Greek Text.  
Translations are compared by 
‖ Tom. 2. Epist. ad Marcellam. Ult. istius Tom.  Hierom, to Muddy Streams, and Originals to the Pure Fountain.  
And therefore, we acknowledge (saith 
* Whitak. in Controu. de Script. Qu. 2. c. 7.  one) no Edition [of the Bible] Authentic, [or of Divine Authority] but the Hebrew in the Old, and the Greek in the New Testament. As for Translations, we approve of them, if they agree, [i. e. with the Originals] if they disagree, we reject them.  
No Translation (saith 
† Featley's Dippers Dipped p. 1.  another) is simply Authentical, or the undoubted Word of God: In the Undoubted Word of God there can be no Error, but in Translations there may be, and are Errors. The Bible translated therefore is no● the undoubted Word of God, but so far only as it agreeth with the Original.  

* Nulla est, sive nostrorum, sive aliorum hominum, cui vel nos ipsos, vel alios addicere velimus. Eas omnes, etc. Chamier. Panstrat. Tom. 1. l. 12. c. 2. §. 3, 5.  There is no [Translation] whether of our own, o● of other Men, to which w● would tie ourselves or other● For all of them, of what Standing, Name or Reputation so ever they be, with what Diligence, Sincerity and Learning soever they were made, are only so far certain, as they accord with the first Context; ● mean, as far as they express that Sense, whic● is certainly manifest to be the Sense of the Hebrew and Greek Words: But if they depart n●ver so little from thence, that Sense which the● give or express, we judge neither to be Divine nor Authentic, nor Canonical; but only Human● Upon Examination it will be found, saith Jessey that in the Ancient; as well as latter Versions, a● many considerable Erratas. See his Life, p. 45 Many things, even in this Newest and Best Translation, do cry aloud for Correction, as the Learne● may easily observe, by comparing it with the Original; and others may quickly find, by looking into Expositors and Commentators, Ibid. p. 52.  
If this now be the Case of Translations, wh● should it be such a Bold Presumption to arraign ou● English Bibles, which are but a Translation, an● do in many things differ from the Original? 'T● true, in the Great and Substantial Points of Religion Matters of prime Necessity to be Believed, or t● be Practised, they are translated with more Exactness according to the Hebrew and Greek, than i● some less Necessary Things; on which the Translators laid too much Stress, being Men devoted t● Ceremonies; where is not that Accordance with the Original, that should have been observed; as were this a convenient Place, might in many In●tances be demonstrated.  
Learned Men have taken the Liberty in their Commentaries and Expositions, to amend our English Translation; where they have found it disagreeing with the Original, and that without any Censure upon them. And tho' the Unlearned cannot search into Originals themselves; yet I hope, ●hey may speak from the Learned, who are thought capable of judging in those Matters. There is certainly Judicium Discretionis, a Judgement of Discretion, to be allowed, even to the Unlearned, that know nothing of the Original Text themselves; or else their Case would be as bad among us, as that of the poor Papists in Spain and Italy, from whom the Priests not only lock the Scriptures up ●n an unknown Tongue; but also deny them any interpretation, save what their pretended Church is pleased to give them. Concil. Trident. Sess. 4.  
Nor does it look in my Apprehension, like a Rash and  Practice, for any to print or publish against their own Teachers and Brethren, such a heavy Charge as this, of being Deeceivers of others in the Matters of God, and Justifying Additions to his Word; if there be just Occasion for it, as there is in the present Matter under Debate. For the Greek Word doth Primarily signify, to Praise, and so it is rendered in several Places in our Old Translations, and here in Mat. 26.30. To Say Grace, which is Simply to Praise, and not to Sing Praise; for every one knows, Saying and Singing are two distinct Acts.  
But it looks very like a Reviving of Papal-Usurpation over the Conscience, when any Teachers shall Impose their own Exposition of Scripture upon their Brethren, and Expect their quiet Reception thereof, without Syllogisms or Disputations, tho' better Reasons may be offered against the Sense Imposed, than are or can be given f● the Imposing of it. What is this in Effect, b● to assume to themselves a Despotical Power or Infallible Chair, and as much as in them lies, brin● the Consciences of their Proselytes under the intolerable Yoke of Blind and Implicit Obedience?  
R. A. But let not any Christian be startle at this Bold Presumption; for I assure you, 'tis a● groundless as 'tis bold. The Original Word used in these Text not only signifying to Praise God, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  (● is pretended) but also to do it by Singing: Th● is attested by the concurrent Evidence of th● most Learned in the Greek Tongue. Essay, p. 1●  
Tho' this be true, that this Word Hymneo 〈◊〉 not limited only to Songs 〈◊〉 Praise, it will not prove (wh● this 
† I. Marlow's Controu. of Singing brought to an End, p. 15.  Author affirms) that is Properly used, or signifi● Simply to Praise: For 'tis possible the Word ma● sometimes signify in a large Sense, Simply 〈◊〉 Praise, and yet the Primary and Proper Signification of it may be to Sing Songs of Praise.— Singing of Praise is the Primary, and so the Prop● Signification thereof, and the other [Significations● are but as Consequent and Figurative Senses of i● Appendix, in Answer to I. Marlowe, p. 59, 60.  
Sect. 3. Answ. And he seems to be so well assured, that to Sing Praise is the Primary and Prope● Signification of Hymneo, that he asserts it severa● times over, Appendix, p. 62, 63, 64. But 'tis no● good to be so very confident; for tho' He tha● is first in his own Cause may seem just, yet his Neighbour cometh and searcheth him, Prov. 18.17. How ever, I promise him a very fair Trial of the Controversy between us; and having examined his Evidence, and produced mine own, I shall leave the Issue to the Verdict of those who are capable of giving Judgement. For the Dispute (as to this Part of it) is about the Primary and Proper Signification of a Greek Word, whereof the Learned in that Language are the only competent Arbiters.  
But before I enter upon this, the former Part of his Paragraph obligeth me to take Notice of two Significations of Hymneo there mentioned; the first whereof is, that it signifieth to Praise God, and the Second, that it denotes a Praising of him by Singing; neither of which Senses are truly given. For,  
First, The Primary and Proper Signification of the Word, is, (as I. M. hath shown) Simply to Praise; and it no more includes God in its Prime and Simple Signification, than Aineo, Eulogeo, and Doxazo; and therefore when Greek Writers apply Hymneo to God, either the Case of the Object is expressed, as 'tis by the Seventy two Translators, Isa. 12.4, 5. and by Luke, Acts 16.25. or, understood by an Ellipsis, or Suppression, which Figure is frequent among the Penmen of Holy Scripture, as well as other Writers. Had the Word Hymneo been of peculiar Ascription to God, there might then have been some Colour for what R. A. hath affirmed: But no such Appropriation of it do I meet with in any Greek Authors, Ancient or Modern, but the contrary: For I find it is spoken of 
* Hymn. in Apol. v. 190.  Gifts, and the 
† Ibid. in Sol. v. 1.  Sun, by Homer: of 
‖ Oper. & Dier. l. 2. v. 280.  Navigation, and the 
* Theogon. v. 100, 101.  Famous Exploits of Ancient Heroes, by Hesiod: of 
(a) De Bel. Pelop. l. 1. p. 19 Edit. Francofurti 1594.  Navies and 
(b) Ibid. l. 2. p. 126.  Cities by Thucydides: of 
(c) Idyl. 17. v. 7, 8.  Men, 
(d) Idyl. 22. v. 219, 220.  Ships, and Battles by Theocritus: of 
(e) Chabotij Praelect. in Hor. Poem. Tom. 1. p. 6.  Husbandry by Xenophon: of 
(f) Prov. 1.20. & 8.3.  Wisdom, and 
(g) 2 Chron. 23.13.  King Joash by the LXX. not to mention any more: Fo● these are sufficient to show the Word is not appropriated to God, and therefore doth not in its Primary Signification denote to Praise God. Which is a plain Confirmation of that Passage quoted by 
* Truth soberly defended, p. 131.  l. M. ou● of 
† Gr. Lexicon. The same saith Phavorinus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Constantine, Neque solum de Dijs, ut quidam tradunt, dicitur, sed etiam de Hominibus, & alijs rebus It is not only spoken of God, as some deliver, but of men and other things also. If the Case of the Object be neither expressed nor understood, it Primarily signifies Simply to Praise.  
Secondly, As Hymneo doth not signify to Praise God, unless the Case of the Object be expressed or understood; so it doth not signify to Praise God by Singing. I confess, sometimes 'tis used in ascribing Praise to God, and that by Singing of it too; but this is no more, than what Aineo, and several other Words are used to do: And therefore it doth not follow, that because the Word is sometimes so used, it must needs have so complex and large a Signification; for it doth not of itself Primarily and Properly signify any more, than Simply to Praise, notwithstanding R. A's. Pretence to the contrary. And this, I hope, I shall make out so fully and clearly, that even they who are of a contrary Persuasion at present, will see Cause sufficient to alter their Opinion; or at least be so far convinced, as to be left without Excuse. Which leads me first to the Examination of the Evidence which he hath brought for the Sense he hath given of the Word Hymneo, and then to produce mine own Testimonies; several whereof especially in this Controversy, are more to be regarded, (because far more Ancient, and also Native Greeks, and so best in all Probability understood their own Language,) than any Authorities alleged or pretended to by R. A. tho', he says, he has the 
* Essay, p. 17.  Concurrent Evidence of the most Learned in the Greek Tongue, or a Cloud of Witnesses, cited in my Essay, as his Phrase is in another 
† Br. Vindication, p. 25.  Place, and in whose Good Company he seems to account it some kind of 
‖ Ibid.  Safety to Err.  
First, Then his Evidence shall be examined; and that I may the more orderly proceed in the Trial thereof, I shall begin with those that are mentioned in his Essay, and then pass to those in his Appendix, which he produceth for his Sense of the Verb Hymneo; where also his Account of the Substantive Hymnos, shall be brought to the Test. The Evidence produced in his Essay, to prove his Sense of the Verb Hymneo, are, Scapula, Stephanus, Pasor, cited in the Margin, p. 17. Our own Translators, Calvin, Beza, Piscator, the French Translators, and many others mentioned by the Learned Pool, in Synops. Crit. These are quoted p. 18. and all these put together would make but a very little Cloud of Witnesses, were it not for [the Many others] he says are mentioned in Pool's Synopsis: Which Expression is little else but a Flourish, for the Many others are but Seven, viz. Erasmus, Illyricus, the Version of Pagnine, that of Tigurum or Zurich, Vatablus, Brugensis, and Hammond: And two of them, viz. Erasmus and Brugensis (
* Synops. Ctit. in Mat 26.30.  Pool tells us) render Hymnesantes, they said or recited Praise, adding, Neque enim constat eos cecinisse, 'Tis not certain that they Sang. And he likewise gives us that Interpretation, both in his Notes upon Mat. 26.30. and Mar. 14.26. in the first Place, as the most proper Rendering, from Tremellius and Castalio.  
The Quotation out of Scapula's Lexicon, if be taken together, and not divided on purpo●● to serve a Turn, will not answer the End for whi● R. A. brings it. For tho' Hymneo be the sa● with Hydo or Hydeo, and sometimes signifieth, Praise in Verse, I Report, or Speak often (as Thom●sius renders the Word Decanto) in Hymns ● Praises; yet Hymneo being a Derivative from Hy● or Hydeo, which is generally taken to be the Primitive Verb, and by Scapula said to be of the sa● Signification; upon Enquiry we find, that the Fi● and Proper Sense which he gives thereof, is, C●lebro, I Praise, and quotes for his Authority H●sychius, and the Greek Etymology. After Ce●bro, I Praise, he puts indeed Canon, I Sing, a● Dico, I Say: But he presently adds, Hymno, A● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lego, to let us know what he intends by Hy● and Hymno; viz. Celebro, I Praise, by Ado, I Sin● and by Lego, I Say; Which are the Distinct a● Proper Significations of those several Greek Word This is the true Representation of this Author, a● tho' he says Hymneo is properly spoken of Poets, a● such as recite Verses; yet he says again, it signifies Simply to Praise; that is, in Prose, as Stephan● tells us, whose larger Work was Epitomised 〈◊〉 Scapula. And now let the Judicious Reader to me, whether there be any thing in this Author that makes for R. A. yea, whether there be ● much as one Passage, that proves Hymneo, either signifies to Praise God, or to Praise him by Singing There is no such thing to be found in Him, bein● truly and impartially Represented.  
Stephanus is the next Author mentioned by R. ● but since he only names him, I shall also dismi● him, without any Examination or Remarks in th● Place.  
Pasor, in his Lexicon of the Words in the Gre● Testament, running the New Rote of some Modern Interpreters, renders Hymneo, I do confess, by Hymnum cano, I Sing Praise, or as some others ●re pleased to have it, an Hymn, tho' this Rendering of his is capable of another Sense. For Canere in Sallust, as 
* Thes. Ling. Rom. & Britan.  Cooper quotes him, signifies to Praise; ●hus Canere aliquem, or Laudes ●licujus, is put for Celebrare & Laudare, to Praise or Extol greatly, and that without Singing. 'Tis also sometimes used for the ●imple Uttering or Pronouncing of ● thing, as we are informed by 
† Dictionar.  Calepine: And then Hymnum ●no may be properly translated here, I Utter, or Pronounce Praise. But suppose we should admit of Pasor's Novel Exposition, that cannot (were ●e of such Reputation among the Learned, as to ●ass for an Author, which I think he hardly doth) ●lter the Primary Meaning of the Word, nor ●rip it of its Ancient Signification, wherewith 'tis Originally clothed.  
As for our last Translators of the Bible, 'tis well known they have their Errata, as well as former Versions; and tho' they have extended the Sense of the Word to Singing, which is at best but a Secondary and Improper Rendering; yet they had no good Authority, as I conceive, for that Interpretation: But being Men zealous for Common, Set-●orm sing, they adventured so to translate it, ●ho ' 'tis a manifest Deviation from the Original, ●s the 
‖ Cyprian, Hierom, Interp. Chrysost. Interp. Theophilac. A Lapide, Tremellius, Castalio, Tyndal, Coverdale, Montanus, Lorinus, Novarinus, Eman. Sa, Maldonat. Marlorat. Aretius.  Authors in the ●argin testify, whose Words shall be cited at ●arge hereafter.  
Calvin, Beza, and Piscator, were Men who in ma●y things did worthily in their Days, but here they missed it, and stretched the Signification 〈◊〉 Hymneo farther than e●ther the 
* Vid. Maldonat. Marlorat. Musculus, & L. Brugensis, in Mat. 26.30.  Word it sel● or Context doth Certainly and Necessarily evince▪  
The French Translators have split upon the sam● Rock, with those before mentioned, and thei● Work, as I have been lately informed, is so Vncorrect, that there are Proposals on Foot for 〈◊〉 New Version, more Exact and Agreeable, to th● Original. And I hearty Wish this of Ours, i● all those Places where 'tis Erroneously done, wer● Faithfully Amended, according to the Hebrew an● Greek.  
Sect. 4. Having thus Examined R. A's. Evidence cited in his Essay for the Sense he there gives of Hymneo, viz. That it signifies not only to Praise Go● but also to do it by Singing; and cannot find, tho● they have Stretched the Word beyond its Prim● and Genuine Signification, namely, to Singing; tha● the Sense R. A. ascribes to it, is so done b● those very Authors; viz. That they use it, either to Praise God, or to Praise him by Singing; as tho● the Word necessarily included [God] in its Signification.  
I proceed in the next Place, to the Trial o● the Rest of his Evidence, produced in his 
† Pag. 60, 61.  Appendix, concerning the Signification of Hymned Where,  
First, In Answer to I. M's. Controversy of Singing brought to an End; He seems to Hesitate a little about the Sense of th● Word; 
‖ Appendix, p. 60.  'Tis possible, saith he the Word may sometimes Signify in a large Sense, Simply to Praise, and ye● the Primary and Proper Signification of it may be to Sing Songs of Praise. Here he speaks only of 〈◊〉 May be, or mere Possibility, that the Word may have this or the other Sense, but positively Determines neither. We know a Word may have various Significations, Primary and Secondary, Proper and Improper; but the main Skill lies, in fixing the Primary and Proper Signification of the Word in Controversy. Therefore,  
Secondly, He undertakes to prove, that Singing of Praise is the Primary, and so the Proper Signification thereof; and that from several of those very Authors which I. M. citys, to prove, that the Word Properly is used Simply to Praise.  
R. A. Leigh tells us in his Critica Sacra, that [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] a Hymn, is a Song to be uttered with the Voice only; and that Hymneo, signifies Primarily [Hymnum cano] to Sing a Hymn; and in the Margin he tells us, [Canere est, & Laudes Deo ad Aras dicere] 'tis to Sing, and to Sing Praises to God at his Altar. This he gives us as the proper Signification of the Word, tho' he after mentions others as less proper Acceptations of it. Append. p. 60.  
Answer.  
1. Leigh doth not tell us, that Hymneo signifies Primarily Hymnum cano, to Sing an Hymn; the Word Primarily being R. A's. Addition, to help his Cause, and not the Author's.  
2. He doth not give us this as the Proper Signification of the Word, and others as less Proper Acceptations of it. For this is not to be found in his Critics, and therefore to be looked upon as the Comment of the Essayer. For Leigh determines not the Matter, whether to Sing an Hymn, or Simply to Praise, be the Proper Signification of the Word; but if any thing can be concluded, touching his Sense about the Primary and Proper Signification of it, 'tis most Probable he understood it to be, Simply to Praise, or give Thanks, (as I. M. hath it, Controu. of Singing, etc. p. 15.) because he not only renders it himself by Laudare, Gratias agere, Hymnum dicere, to Praise, to give Thanks, to speak, Praise; but also quotes the 
* Hymno dicto, Praise being spoken.  Vulgar Latin, the 
† Laudem dederunt, they gave Praise.  Arabic Version, 
‖ Dixissent laudes, they had spoken Praises.  Novarinus, and the 
(a) Dictis laudibus, Praises being spoken.  to corroborate that Interpretation.  
The Signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymnus, shall be spoken to hereafter. And as for the Marginal Citation in Leigh's Critics, Canere est, & laudes, etc. This may serve for an Answer; he vouches no Authority for it, as he doth for the other Rendring.  
R. A. Symson in his Lexicon, puts down as the Primary, and so the Proper Signification, [Hymnum, Hymnos cano] to Sing an Hymn, or Hymns. Appendix, ibid.  
Answ. He puts down Hymnum, Hymnos cano, I Sing an Hymn, or Hymns; but doth not say, as the Primary Signification: For he hath also Hymnum dicto, I speak an Hymn, and Speaking is surely prior to Singing; for there must be Speech, before there can be an Artificial Modulation of it. And Laudo, I Praise; and when he sets down the Greek Words, to Sing, he puts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ado, Psallo; not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymneo.  
R. A. Constantine also, in his Greek, Lexicon, sets down as the Primary and Proper Signification of this Word, [Dico Hymnum, Hymnos canto] to Sing an Hymn, or Hymns, and thence derives [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Cantator, Poeta] a Singer, or Poet. Appendix, ibid.  
Answer,  
1. Dico Hymnum, is not truly and properly translated, to Sing an Hymn; for Dicere Hymnum, is properly to Say an Hymn, or Praise; unless it be used Metonymically and Improperly; but than it can no ways be serviceable to R. A. for 'tis the Primary and Proper Signification which he would contend for; but this is Secondary and Improper, which he here gives us.  
2. Constantine thence derives [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymnesis, Laudatio] a Praising, and [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymnetes, Laudator] a Praiser; and not [Cantator, Poeta] a Singer, a Poet.  
He likewise hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hydo, Hymno, Laudo, I Praise, before he sets down Canon, I Sing. And 
* Herodot. in Constant. Lex.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Celebrati sunt, they were Praised. And 
‖ Gaza de Senectute, ibid.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, De meis viribus praedico, I Praise mine own Strength.  
The Author of the Reflections on I. M's. Appendix to his Treatise, Entitled [Prelimited Forms, etc.] at the End of B. Keach's Book, concerning sing, and referred to by R. A. Essay, p. 18. acknowledgeth a Difference between Singing, and Saying or Pronouncing an Hymn, according to Constantine, not Confounding (as R. A. doth) Dico Hymnum, and Hymnum canto. And the Reason which he gives, why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymneo, is used for Saying or Pronouncing an Hymn, contributes more than probably he was ware of, to the clearing up of its Primary Signification. The Reason may be, saith he, because Saying or Pronouncing is necessarily included in Singing; for Singing is but a particular Mode of Saying or Pronouncing: Reflect. p. 50. For if it be so, than it will necessarily follow, seeing Hymneo is used both to Say or Pronounce, and to Sing an Hymn, (which latter Rendering he sets down first, and the other last, inverting the Order which Constantine uses in placing of the Words) that to Say or Pronounce an Hymn, is the First and Proper Signification, because the Thing itself is before the particular Mode thereof; and therefore if Singing be (as he says) but a particular Mode of Saying or Pronouncing; to Say or Pronounce an Hymn, must needs be in Order of Time as well as Nature, precedent to Singing. And if it was not thus, (as it appears plainly it is) I might say, by Retortion of his own Remark, it is the common Fate of all Words to be stretched beyond their Prime and most Proper Signification; and who can help it, seeing that the Wit and Fancy of Men are such luxuriant things, that will make bold sometimes, not only with Words, but Persons too? Reflect. ibid.  
R. A. The Learned Ainsworth does not translate the Word (as our Author represents him) Simply Praise, (as if it signified no more) but he tells us, (on Psal. 3.) that There be three kinds of Songs mentioned in this Book, of which one (he tells us) is called Tehillah, in Greek, Hymnos, a Hymn or Praise. Appendix, p. 61.  
Answ. To this I. M. hath very well replied in his last little 
‖ Clear Confutation, etc. p. 4, 5.  Tract, and thither I refer the Reader. But forasmuch as R. A. concludes with Ainsworth, that one of the three Kind's of Songs, mentioned in the Book of Psalms, is called Tehillah, and in Greek Hymnos, an Hymn or Praise, I entreat him to tell us, which of the Psalms it is that is so called? for I have made a diligent Search into the Septuagint, but cannot find any Psalm with that Inscription, viz. Hymnos, an Hymn or Praise. I find indeed 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Tehillah often translated, Hymnos as Psal. 40.3.65.1.100.4.119.171. & 148.14. and 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hymnesis, Psal. 71.6. Simply Praise; but this is in the Text, and not any where in the Titles. 'Tis true 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  En Hymnois, is in the Title of Psal. 6.54.55.61.67.76. but Hymnos is not the Title itself, neither is it used by the LXX. in any of those Places to signify Praise, or an Hymn; but a Musical Instrument, called 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Neginath, which comes from the Root 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Nagan, 
‖ Robertson. Concord. Lex. Hebraeo-Chald. Bythner Lyra Prophet.  to Play with the Hand upon such an Instrument.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymnoi, is also used by the LXX. in the last Verse of Psal. 72. but there 'tis rendered by Trem. and Junius, Orationes, and so by 
* Lex. Heb. in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Buxtorf, and several 
† Aethiop. Verse. Piscator, Montanus, Gejerus, Chald. Paraph. Grotius, in Synop. Crit.  Others; and Supplicationes, Preces by 
‖ Lyra Prophet. n. 178.  Bythner, and Prayers, both by our Translators and Ainsworth himself: The Hebrew Word being there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tephilloth from 
* Buxtorf. Lex. Heb.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He judged, he prayed; and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tehillah, Praise, from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Halal, Laudare, to Praise.  
The Word is likewise used, Psal. 137.3. for which there is nothing in Trem. and Junius' Translation, but in 
* They that wasted us, required of us Mirth.  Ours and 
† They that threw us on heaps, [asked of us] Mirth.  Ainsworth's 'tis Mirth: which is the true Rendering of the Heb. 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Laetitia; See Montanus, Schindler, Mercer, Buxtorf, Bythner, Robertson.  Simchah. The LXX. do there express Song, by 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Ode, and not by Hymnos, to make a Distinction between them; for whereas Our Translation hath it, Required of us a Song, the Heb. is 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Dibre-shir, and the Greek 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Logous Odon, the Words of Songs; and when the Heb. expresseth simply Mirth, v. 3. or Joy, v. 6. It doth it by Simchah, and the Greek by Hymnos, and Euphrosyne.  
Ainsworth indeed puts the Word Hymn, in the Title of Psal. 145. but without any good Authority for so doing; for there the LXX. have 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Ainesis, 
† Trem. Junius.  Laudatio, or 
‖ Gejerus, Muis, Montanus.  Laus, Praise. The Hebrew Word, I grant, is Tehillah but what then? the Septuagint have not rendered it by Hymnos, but by Ainesis So that neither this, nor any other Psalm, is therefore a Song from the Title; for some of them have in Heb. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Tephillah, in Greek, 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Proseuche, a Prayer, as Psal. 17, 86.90.102. Some in Heb. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Michtam, a Golden Jewel, in Greek, 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Stelographia, as Psal. 16. or 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Eyes Stelographian, an Inscription upon a Pillar, as Psal. 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 Some in Heb. 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Maschil, in Greek 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Synesis, Understanding or Instruction, as Psal. 32, 41 44, 45, 53, 54, 55, 74, 78, 88 One 
(c) ut supra.  Maschil and 
(d) ut supra.  Proseuche, Instruction and Prayer, as Psal. 142. and several Others 
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Allelonia, according to the Septuagint, as Psal. 105, 106, 107, 111, 112, 113, 114 116, 117, 118, 119, 135, 136, and 146. to the End Now if because the Psalms were Songs, used i● Temple-Worship, the Words in their several Titles must therefore signify Singing, what a Confusion shall we make of Words, when those very Words which are of a different Signification must yet be used promiscuously, and that merely to please some Persons, in an unaccountable Notion, and a groundless Practice? Whatever becomes of their Mistaken, tho' Darling Conceptions, we must either keep to the Distinction and Propriety of Words, or we shall soon lose the Propriety of Things, and so inevitably slide into an Indistinction of Duties.  
R. A. In like manner the Learned Dr. Owen (on Heb. 2.12.) teaches us, that the Primary and Proper Sense of the Word Hymneo, is to Sing Praise; and adds, that tho' the Hebrew Word [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] Psal. 22.24. be rendered Simply to Praise, yet it's most frequent use, when it respects God as its Object, is to Praise by Hymns or Psalms, as the Apostle here, [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, tibi Hymnos canam] I will Sing Hymns unto thee, or [te Hymnis Celebrabo] I will Praise thee with Hymns, which was the principal Way of Setting forth God's Praise under the Old Testament. And seeing this Reverend Author tells us, that this was the principal Way of setting forth God's Praise under the Old Testament, it is unreasonable to imagine, that he in the least designed to exclude this Way of Doing it under the New; especially seeing himself, and the People under his Care, were in the constant Practice of this Duty. 'Tis true, the Doctor understands this Expression, In the midst of the Church will I sing Praise to thee, to comprehend all those Ways, whereby the Mediator glorified God as well as Singing, but he in no wise interprets it so, as to exclude Singing to be a part of his Work. Appendix, p. 61, 62.  
Sect. 5. Answ. This being the same for Substance with what B. Keach in his Answer to I. Marlow's Appendix, and the Author of the Reflections , p. 69. have already replied; I desire the Reader impartially to peruse what I. M. hath said in those useful 
* Appendix to Prelimited Forms, p. 3, 4, 5, 6. Truth soberly defended, p. 127, 128, 129. The Controversy of Singing brought to an End, p. 16.  Treatises which he hath written about Singing. The Dr. (on Heb. 2.12.) doth fully prove the Point for which I. M. quoted him, viz. 
† The Controversy, etc. Ibid. ubi supra.  That tho' he reads the Word Hymneo, to Sing Praise, (following therein the last English Translation, which hath departed from the Genuine Sense of the Word) in accommodation to the Old Testament Temple-Worship, yet he doth no● limit the Signification of it to Songs of Praise. For he there tells us, 
‖ Owen on Heb. 2.12.  It is a fond Imagination which some have fallen upon, that God is no● praised in the Church for the Work of Redemption, unless it be done by Words and Hymns▪ particularly expressing it. Yea, The Dr. further says, that the Original Hebrew, Psal. 22.22. is expressly rendered Simply to Praise; and tho' he adds, that it's most frequent Use, when it respects God as the Object, is to Praise by Psalms, or Hymns, yet 
* Lex.  Scapula tells us, the Word Hymnos is used so but 
† Interdum.  Sometimes, and the 
‖ Ubi supra.  Dr. himself explains his own Meaning of that Expression in two Particulars.  
1. Observing to us what Christ undertakes to do, and that is to Praise God.  
2. The Cheerfulness and Alacrity of the Spiri● of Christ in this Work, he would do it [as] with Joy and sing; with such a frame of Heart a● was required in them, who were to Sing the Praise● of God in the great Assembly in the Temple.  
So that in all the Dr. says, in that Place, there not so much as One Word of Intimation, that ●e Primary and Proper Sense of Hymneo, is to Sing ●raise, or of Christ's Singing Praise, in the Vulgar acceptation of the Words; any otherways than 〈◊〉 Setting forth the Love, Grace, Goodness and ●ercy of God, (which he also calls the Declaring 〈◊〉 his Name) with such Cheerfulness and Alacri●, [as] with Joy and sing; but not formally ●ith that Kind of Singing which consists in a Me●dious Tuning of the Voice. And therefore whither was the Practice of the Dr. and the People ●nder his Care, that can signify little in the Matter; ●r 'tis neither his Judgement, nor his Practice, as to ●ommon-singing, that I. M. insists upon; but the urs'. Sense of the Word Hymneo, in his Exposition ●n Heb. 2.12. which B. Keach's Learned Hand, 〈◊〉 Author of the Reflections pre-cited] and R. A. ●mself have mistaken. For though" the Dr. understands this Expression, In the midst of the Church will I Sing Praise to thee, to comprehend all those Ways, whereby the Mediator Glorified God, as well as Singing; yet he in no wise so expounds it, as to ●ccasion us to believe, he took the Primary and Pro●●r Sense of Hymneo to be, to Sing Praise. For he neither finds fault with the English Version of Psal. 22. ●2. where the Heb. Word [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] is rendered Simpy to Praise; and the LXX. have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymned se; I will Praise thee: Nor doth he say Absolutely, It's most frequent Use is to Praise by Hymns 〈◊〉 Psalms; but Comparatively only, viz. When it respects God as its Object: Nor that it includes God] in its Signification, but plainly intimates ●y this Expression, When it respects God as its Object, ●hat the Object [God] must either be Expressed ●r Understood.  
Besides, the Dr. being a Man of very great Learning, could not, I suppose, but know that the Heb. Word [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] Hillel, when it respects God as 〈◊〉 Object, is more frequently translated by the LXX. [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉], Aineo, Laudo, I Praise, than by Hymn Hymnos cano, I S●●● Hymns; which tho' be sometimes used in th● Extended and Impro● Sense, yet in 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, They praised their God.  Jud● 16.24. 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Praised the Lord.  2 Chron. ● 21. 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Will I praise thee.  Psal. 22.22. 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Praise the Lord.  Isa. 12.4. and 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I will praise thy Name.  25. 'tis used Simply to Praise  
Object. But to this R. A. perhaps, or some oth●● may Object, that the H● Word is 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hodu, Confitemini.  Jadah, in 〈◊〉 12.4. & 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Odeh, Confitebor.  25.1. 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Zammeru, Psallite.  Z●mer in Isa 12.5. a● 1 Chron. 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Jashiru, Canent.  16.9. and 〈◊〉 Shur in Psal. 65.13. 〈◊〉 First of which signifies to Confess, the Second Play upon the Harp, and the Third to Sing; which the LXX. have translated by Hymneo; a● therefore Hymneo signifies Primarily, to Sing.  
Answ. I have shown befo●● that 
* p. 61, 62, 63, etc.  Hymneo, Primarily and Properly signifies Simply to Prai●● and I further Answer, that t● the LXX. or any other Writers, have extended Sense, and applied it to Singing; yet their Figurative Application destroys not its Primary Signification. The Learned also know, that the LX● have not only extended the Sense of this Word, b● of several others: For Instance, 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Sa● Pneuma, Rhema, Kyrios, are Wor● which Primarily and Properly signify Flesh, Wind, Word, Lord or Maste● yet they often use the First, sometime for Man himself, sometimes for Humane Nature, ●nd sometimes for the Infirmity and Vitiosity thereof; ●he Second for Spirit, the Third for Thing or Bu●ness, and the Last for Jehovah. Now as the lat●er Use of these, and the like Words, doth not di●est them of their Prime and Genuine Sense; 〈◊〉 so is in the Case before us: The Lax and Extended ●se of Hymneo, wherein 'tis applied to Singing, ●oth not alter its Strict and Primary Sense, which 〈◊〉 Simply to Praise.  
And as to Heb. 2.12. have consulted several 
* Printed in the Years 1535. 1540, 1541, 1585., 1591.  ancient Bibles upon it, ●l which unanimously render Hymneso se, Will I ●raise thee, exactly according to the Hebrew, in ●sal. 22. from whence 'tis ●ken; See also 
† Nou. Test. Vol. Polyglot.  Hutter, Robertson, 
† Nou. Test. Heb.  the 
(a) Transl. Syr. ab Imman. Trem. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ashabbechach, Celebrabo te, I will praise thee.  Syriac ●ersion and Tremellius, ●here the Propriety of ●e Word is preserved.  
" R. A. As to his Citation out of Marlorate, who tells us, that the Word Hymnesantes, [Non necessariò evincit, quòd cecinerint] doth not necessarily evince that they Sang: I have not that Author by me, and therefore cannot see whether he hath more largely explained himself, but if he hath not, I doubt not to reject his Interpretation; because the Primary and Proper Sense of the Word being to Sing Praise, it therefore (being used in these Texts) doth necessarily evince that they did Sing, unless any necessary Reason could be alleged to prove they did not. Appendix, p. 62.  
Answ. Marlorate is truly cited by I. M. and ●eing R. A. had not the Author by him, to see whether he more largely explained himself, I ha● therefore strictly examined his Ecclesiastical Exposit●●● of Mat. 26.30. and do assure R. A. he hath n●▪ For having told us from Paulus Burgensis, that 'tw●● the Custom of the Jews, after they had eaten 〈◊〉 Paschal Lamb, to Sing, from Psal. 112. to the 11● and that the said Burgensis thought this was 〈◊〉 Hymn which Christ Sang with his Disciples; a having also conclude from 
* Paulus Burgensis was a Christian Jew, and lived about the Year 1415. I find most Commentatours take their Quotations of the Jews Singing at the Passover from him: The Institution mentions no such thing, and therefore, the Singing Burgensis speaks of, was a Humane Addition to the Passover.  him, that as 〈◊〉 as the Jews Celebrated the Passover, they we wont to Sing an Hymn he seems presently 〈◊〉 recollect himself, as th● he had gone too far, a● adds, Incertum tam videtur, quibus hie V●bis Deum laudârint, & an cecinerint hanc laude an simpliciter dixerint: Graecum Verbum Laude quidem, maximè quae Deo debetur, includit, n● autem Necessariò, evincit quòd cecinerint. Nev●●theless it seems uncertain, with wh● words 
* [viz. Christ and his Disciples]▪  they here Praised Go● and whether they Sang this Prai●● or Simply Spoke it: The Gre●● Word indeed includes Praise, epsecially such as due to God, but it doth not Necessarily Evince, that th● Sang. And this is all he delivers about t● Sense of this Word, without the least Addition 〈◊〉 way of Explanation or Qualification. But t●● Excellently Learned August● Marlorate, as 
† Ecclesiast. History, p. 893. Vol. 3.  Bulkley, (t● Continuator of Fox's Acts a● Monuments of Martyrs,) fro● that Famous French Historian Thuanus, styles him, a● who suffered Martyrdom at Rovan, in the Cause Christ, An. 1562. is of so small Account with R. ●. that he doubts not to reject his Interpretation, tho' he had not seen his Book 
* Indictâ causâ damnare, This is in effect to condemn him unheard. . An Indiscretion surely in R. A. that had I not seen it in Print, I could hardly have thought him guilty of it!  
The Reason R. A. gives, for rejecting Marlorate's Interpretation, is Plausible indeed, but 'tis Precarious; for he takes it for granted, that the Primary and Proper Sense of Hymneo is to Sing Praise, which he ought first (were such a thing possible) to have proved. And whereas he says, It therefore (being used in these 
† Mat. 26.30. Mar. 14.26.  Texts) doth necessarily evince that they did Sing, unless any Necessary Reason could be alleged to prove they did not: I think this is one sufficient Reason to prove they did not Sing, especially against him; in that he so confidently rejects what he is not able to Answer, and flies to mere Evasions, under Pretext of Arguments. But in slighting Marlorate's Interpretation, R. A. contemns not him alone; for he is not the only Man that was of that Opinion: 
* Neque enim constat eos cecinisse, It is not certain that they Sang. Synops. Crit. in Mat. 26.30.  Erasmus, 
† Graecum Verbum— non necessariò evincit, quòd cecinerint. The Greek Word doth not necessarily evince, that they Sang. Com. in Mat. 26.30. Tom. 3.  Musculus, 
‖ An cecinerint non satis constat, Whether they sang is not sufficiently certain. Super loc.  Maldonate, and 
(a) Non necessariò evincit Vox Graeca, quòd cecinerint, The Greek Word doth not necessarily evince, that they Sang. Sup. loc.  Lucas Brugensis, (as before ●s Noted, pag. 63, 66.) were of the same Mind, whose Words I have set down in the Margin, for ●he Satisfaction and Benefit of the Meanest Reader.  
Sect. 6. Having thus considered R. A's. Evidences, both in his Essay and Appendix, which, he says, prov● that the Primary and Proper Signification of th● Verb Hymneo, is to Sing Praise; and made it man●fest, that 'tis Simply to Praise: The next thing i● Order to be brought to the Test, is the Account h● gives us of the Substantive Hymnos.  
R. A. And they (that is, the Learned) d● yet more particularly assure us, that a Hymn doth necessarily include these 
* Hymni laudes sunt Dei cum cantico, hymni cantus sunt continentes laudem Dei. Si sit laus & non sit Dei, non est hymnus. Si fit laus & Dei laus, & non cantetur, non est hymnus. Oportet ergo ut, fi fit hymnus habeat haec tria, & laudem, & Dei, & canticum. Aug. in Psal. 72. And thus also the Learned and Pious Dr. Du Veil tells us, out of Ruffinus, on Acts 16.25. Hymnus est cantilena continens laudem Dei. Minsh. Hymnus est cantio qua laudes Dei decantantur. Pasoris Lex. You may see this more fully proved to be the Sense of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by a Learned Minister of Christ, in a short Discourse at the End of B. Keach's Book concerning sing.  thre● things: 1. Tha● the Matter of i● be Praise. 2▪ That it be t● God, as the Object of it. An● 3. That it b● Sung. And 〈◊〉 either of these be wanting, 'tis not properly an Hymn. Essay, p. 17, 18.  
Answ. It will be a difficult thing, I suppose, so R. A. to reconcile this Passage in his Essay, an● what he hath delivered in his Appendix; for there p. 59, 60. he grants that the Word Hymneo is no limited only to Songs of Praise, and that 'tis poss●ble it may sometimes signify in a large Sense, Si●ply to Praise. But here he quotes Angustine, D● Veil out of Ruffinus, Minshew, Pasor, and a Learn Minister of Christ, to prove the Restriction 〈◊〉 Hymnos to Songs of Praise, and God the Sole Object thereof: This I desire may be particularly N●ted, because he who in one Book allows of a large Signification, yet in this brings the pre-mentione Authors to give us a particular Assurance of its Restriction.  
I have a great Respect for the Name of Augustine, so far as he Embraced and Adhered to the Truth; but he was not so Wise a Master-Builder, as to lay no Chaff upon the Good Foundation. This great Man was not free from great Mistakes. 
* Enchirid. ad Laurentium, cap. 43.  He saith, That Water-Baptism Washed away all 
† That is, the Gild, tho' not the Infirmity, as he says, Lib. 3. contra duas Epist. Pelag. cap. 3.  Sin, both in Young and Old that were Baptised. 
‖ Epist. 107. & Lib. 28. de Civ. Dei, & saepe alibi.  He Condemned Infants dead without Water-Baptism, to the Torment of Eternal Fire. 
(a) Lib. 4. de Genesi ad Literam.  He held, That the World was created, not in Six Days, as Moses relateth, but in a Moment: 
(b) Enchirid. ad Laurent. cap. 109.  That the Souls of the Dead are kept ●n certain hidden Receptacles, until the last Resurrection: 
(c) Ibid. cap. 110.  And That the Good Works of the Liv●ng are profitable to the Dead, who in their Life-time ●ave Merited this Benefit. These, and sundry other Naevi, or Errors, Augustine had; and therefore ●s he was liable to Mistakes about Things, 'tis no Wonder if he Erred about Words. His Testimony ●hen is to be considered according to what it is, ●nd not merely according to the Name he carries; ●or thats no Ingredient in the Constitution of Truth.  
1. He says, Hymni laudes sunt Dei cum Can●co, Hymni Cantus sunt continentes laudes Dei. 〈◊〉 sit laus & non sit Dei, non est Hymnus. Hymns ●re Praises of God with a Song, Hymns are Songs containing the Praises of God. If it be Praise, and ●●n of God, it is not an Hymn.  
Answ. The Restriction of an Hymn to God only, 〈◊〉 contrary to the whole Current of the Ancients, viz. Homer, Hesiod, Thucydides, Theocritus, Xenophon● the LXX. Phavorinus, as hath been shown, p. 61, 62▪ to Plato, Plutarch, and Herodian, as shall be manifested hereafter, all which lived long befor● Augustine, and Wrote in Greek; for Augustin● flourished about the latter End of the Fourth and Beginning of the Fifth Centuries, and wa● One of the Latin Fathers; but Homer lived abov● Thirteen, and Herodian above One Hundred Year before him.  
This Limitation is also contradicted by Prude●tius, who was a Learned Latin Poet, Contemporary with Augustine, and Wrote several Hymns, in Vario●● Sorts of Verse: See his Book of Hymns, Entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Of Crowns; there, Hymn 

1. Is to Hemiterius and Chelidonius of Calaguri●  
2. To Laurentius, Archdeacon.  
3. To the Virgin Eulalia.  
4. To 18 Martyrs of Saragossa.  
5. To Vincentius, Martyr.  
6. To Fructuosus, Bp. of Arragon, and Augury and Eulogius, Deacons.  
7. To Quirinus, Martyr and Bp. of Siscia.  
8. To the Baptisterium, or Baptizing-Place, whe● two Martyrs suffered.  
9 To Cassianus, Martyr.    
Now these Hymns are not Laudes Dei, Praise of God, but of the Persons who are the Subjects of them; as they who are inquisitive ma● soon inform themselves. And least R. A. shoul● Reply; True indeed, the Martyrs are the Subject of these Hymns, but God is the Object; for a● their Encomiums are directed to his Glory. Thi● I think, will be sufficient to Obviate so Wea● an Effort, in that they are not only Praises of but also to the Martyrs themselves; for they an Hymns to such and such: Yea, in some of them, the Poet advances too high, even to Praying to the Martyrs, which is Idolatry. Thus he Prays to 
* 
Audi benignus supplicem  
Christi reum Prudentium,  
Et servientem corpori,  
Absolve vinclis Seculi.   Laurentius, Hymn 2. To the 18 
† 
Nos pio fletu, date, perluamus  
Marmorum Sulcos, quibus est operta  
Spes, ut absolvam retinaculorum Vincla meorum.   Martyrs, Hymn 4. and to 
‖ 
Adesto nunc, & percipe  
Voces precan●ûm supplices,  
Nostri reatûs efficax  
Orator ad Thronum Patris.   Vincentius, Hymn 5. Yea, ●his Blind and Superstitious Zeal, Hymn 3. misled him to think 
(a) 
Sic venerarier ossa libet,  
Ossibus Altar & impositum.   Eulali●'s Bones ought to be Worshipped, and an Altar built upon them.  
Eustathius, a Man eminently skilled in the Greek Tongue, as appears by his Learned Commentaries upon Homer, tells us, in his Notes upon the two last Verses of Dionysius' Description of the World, that 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hymnos is not only spoken of Divine Praise, but also of o●her things; whereof he gives Instances from several Ancient Greek 
† Pindar, Aeschylus, Hesiod and Euripides.  Poets.  

‖ Gr. Lex.  Constantine is also of the same Judgement, as I have before Noted. p. 62.  
And Scapula, as is already hinted, p. 74. says, Hym●os is 
* Interdum peculiariter dicitur carmen in honorem Dei. Lex.  Sometimes peculiarly called a Verse, or poem, in the Honour of God: And if but sometimes so used, than it doth not necessarily include God for its Object.  
And thus the first Part of R. A's. Testimony ●ut of Augustine, is sufficiently Answered, and made so plain to every Indifferent Eye, that he that runs may read it. And Augustine being refuted Du Veil, Ruffinus, Minshew, and Pasor, who hav● Erred with him, are jointly and severally comprehended in his Refutation.  
But R. A. informs us, We may see this mor● fully proved to be the Sense of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a Learned Minister of Christ, in the End o● B. Keach's Book concerning sing.  
Answ. Most of that Learned Minister's Quotations, viz. from Leigh, Constantine, Ainsworth, an● Dr. Owen, have been Answered already, p. 67,— 7● in my Reply to R. A's. Appendix, p. 60, 61. an● the Proof from thence is found to fall short 〈◊〉 what is pretended. And tho' that Learned Ma● hath laboured without Success to prove that Hymnos, most Properly denotes a 
* Reflections, p. 49.  Song of Praise and 
† Ibid. p. 50.  Primarily and Chief signifies an Hymn or Copy of Verses made to Praise; yet 〈◊〉 contends not for its Restriction to Singing of Praise God only; but grants, 
‖ Ibid.  The Object an Hymn or Hymning, according to the Usage in Profane Authors, ha●● been extended both to Men and Things; a● citys Scapula, as I have done, rendering the Wo●● Irrestrictively, and saying, 
* Ibid. p. 51.  Sometimes It peculiarly signifies Verse composed for the Honour of God: A●● therefore I cannot Imagine why R. A. should ●●fer us to this Author for a more full Proof, th● an Hymn necessarily includes God, as the Object seeing he is so far from Limiting the Use of 〈◊〉 to God, that he expressly acknowledgeth its E●tension both to Men and Things.  
The Literal Faults in this Learned Minist●● Reflections, and such as respect the right Pointing or Accenting of the Greek, I can easily place among the Errata of the Press, as [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sibi for Tibi, p. 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, five times over, p. 49, 50, 51, 52. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 50. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Carnem for Carmen, p. 52.] but how can we ascribe this Passage to the Printer's Oversight? But such as took the Radix, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, have translated the Words otherwise, as Jun. and Trem. 
* Note this is the Translation of Montanus, Psal. 78.63. and not of Jun. and Trem.  Non Epithalamio celebratae sunt, i. e. were not honoured with a Wedding-Song, p. 52. When their Translation is, Non laudarentur, were not Praised; Or what shall we say to this? On Ver. 20. he gives an Account out of Josephus, of the Jews manner in Eating the Passover, and closing item with an Hymn, consisting of Psal. 113. and the five immediately following, which the Jews call their Magnum Hallelujah, their great Song of Praise to God, p. 53.  
For there is no such Account out of Josephus, as I can find, either in Leigh's Critics, or in Beza's Notes upon the Place; and they are the Author's he refers to. All which Mistakes, both Literal, Punctual and Verbal, committed in the Compass of Nine Octavo Pages, (for the Reflections consist of no more,) considered by any Indifferent Arbiter, cannot but incline him to think the Erroneous Translation of Marlorate, p. 55. Non autem necessariô evincit, but undoubtedly it doth evince, for It doth not necessarily evince, was rather the Oversight of the Reflecter, than Printed by a Mistake of the Overseer of the Press, as he Apologises for himself, in his Epistle at the End of R. A's. Animadversions and Appendix.  
2. Augustine says, Si sit laus, & Dei laus, & non cantetur, non est Hymnus, If it be Praise, and of God, and be not Sung, it is not an Hymn.  
Answ. This being an Assertion without Proof, and contrary to the Primary and Proper Signification of the Word, which is Simply Praise, let us see how R. A. endeavours to make it out.  
R. A. Tho' some render it, (viz. Hymnesantes) an Hymn being said, yet this is so far from contradicting ours, (viz. Our Translation) which tells us they Sang it, that it indeed implies the same thing, a Hymn necessarily including Singing, as hath been proved. And tho' some o● our Old Translations render it, they said Grace or They Praised God, yet none of them tell us, they did it not by Singing. Essay, p. 18, 19  
But supposing these Translators intended so to Intimate, (which is not likely, they being themselves in the Practice of Singing, as a part of Divine Worship) it will only follow, that they have mistaken the Sense of the Words, Those ancient Translations being not made so much from the Original, as from some other Latin Versions, as the Learned Bishop Wilkins tells us, in his Gift of Preaching, (p. 48.) and they might take the Latin Version [Hymno dicto] in the Vulgar, and Montanus, to signify no more than a Hymn being said, whereas indeed it properly signifies, a Hymn being Sung, for so this Word [Dicere] generally signifies in the best Latin Authors, when used with a Word that signifies any Poetical Composure. Thus Dicere Versus, in Virgil, [Eclog. 5. line 2.] is Too Sing Verses; and Dicere Carmen, in the same Author, [Eclog. 5. line 50, 51.] is To Sing a Song; and Dicere Laudes, in Horace, [Carmen seculare, line 76.] is Too Sing Praises: In all which, and many other Places, where it is used in such Phrases, 'tis rendered [Canere] to Sing; by those very Learned Expositors of these Authors, [in Vsunt Delphini] for the Use of the Dauphin. Appendix, p. 63.  
Answ. There are many that render Hymnesantes, Hymno dicto, an Hymn or Praise being said, as Hierom, Beda, and the Latins generally, 'til Erasmus undertook to Correct the Vulgar Latin, and changed Hymno dicto, an Hymn or Praise being said, into Cum Hymnum cecinissent, when they had sung an Hymn or Praise; thereby stretching the Greek Word beyond its Native and Proper Signification, to One Adventitious and Improper. And what tho' there is no Contradicton between Saying and Singing an Hymn? It doth not follow that the former implys the latter; for how many Thousand Synonymous Words and Identical Propositions, should we have more than there are, if things not Contradictory employed the same? Were this True, as undoubtedly 'tis not, there would be no Distinction, but where there is a Contradiction; and then Dipping and Sprinkling, Preaching and Praying, would not differ; for these are not Contradictory Terms or Acts, and therefore according to R. A. imply the same thing. Nay, if Saying an Hymn implies Singing, than it seems, if a Man should Say an Hymn of Prudentius, or One of his own Composure, and not use any such Modulation of the Voice, as is called Singing, he implicitly Sings it. But surely R. A. will dismiss this Notion upon better Thoughts, especially, if he thinks he spoke properly, Essay, p. 29. where he describes Singing, to be an Expression and Modulation of the Voice, different from mere Speaking, and all other Expressions of it: For if this Description of Singing be stood to, Saying cannot possibly imply Singing, which he himself makes so vastly different from. When I compared what he says, Essay, p. 19 with p. 29. I could not see how he could reconcile them, unless he had imbibed this Notion, that Two Contradictory Propositions are Equipollent or Convertible; and that 'tis no Absurdity to Affirm, and Deny the same thing of the same Subject, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the same respect, as the Logicians speak. But tho' R. A. is pleased one while to Confound Saying and Singing, and another while to distinguish them; yet in all English Authors to the best of my Observation, they are constantly distinguished. If he can produce one Example to the contrary, I desire him to do it: I will give him a few Instances for the present to prove their Distinction, which the Compilers of the Common-Prayer-Book, (out of which I have Collected them) do constantly observe in the Rubrics.  
Then shall be 
* Morn. Prayer.  Said or Sung this Psalm following.  
Then shall be 
† Ibid.  Said or Sung in English, the Hymn called, Te Deum laudamus.  
Then shall be 
‖ Ibid.  Sung or Said the Apostles Creed by the Minister.  
Then shall be 
* Even. Prayer.  Said or Sung the Psalms in Order as they are appointed. Then a Lesson out of the Old Testament, as is appointed; and after that, Magnificat, (or the Song of the Blessed Virgin Mary) in English.  
Then shall be 
† Ibid.  Said or Sung the Apostles Creed by the Minister and the People standing.  
The like Direction is given about the Litany, the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds. And in the Order for the Burial of the Dead, The Priests and Clerks meeting the Corpse at the Entrance of the Churchyard, and Going before it, either into the Church, or towards the Grave, shall Say or Sing, I am the Resurrection and the Life, etc.  
While the Corpse is made ready to be laid into the Earth, the Priest shall Say, or the Priest and Clerks shall Sing, Man that is born of a Woman, hath but a short time to live, etc.  
And while the Earth shall be cast upon the Body, the Priest shall Say, Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God of his great Mercy, to take unto himself the Soul of our Dear Brother [or Sister] here departed, etc. And after this 'tis added, Then shall be Said or Sung, I heard a Voice from Heaven, saying unto me Writ, from henceforth Blessed are the Dead, etc. And in all these Places the Distinction is observed both in the Latin and Greeks Translations of the Common-Prayer-Book.  
But R. A. proceeds, Tho' some of our Old Translations render it, They said Grace, or They Praised God, yet none of them tell us, they did it not by Singing. What then? because they do not tell us, they did it not by Singing, is it good Logic to infer they did it by Singing? Suppose ● Paedo-baptist, to prove the Lawfulness of Sprinkling, or Pouring Water upon Infants or Adult Persons, should use this Medium, viz. Tho' the Scriptures tell us, that Adult Persons were Baptised, yet they do not say, that any were not Baptised by Sprinkling or Pouring; for this the Scriptures do not say in Express Terms: Or a Papist, to prove the Corporal and Carnal Presence of Christ ●n the Eucharist, should argue, that when Christ took Bread, and said, This is my Body, he did not tell ●is Disciples, there was no Conversion of the Bread ●nto his Body: Would R. A. grant either of them their Argument, upon so Weak a Bottom as this ●ind of Plea must be acknowledged to be? I suppose he would not; and yet his own Medium to ●rove Singing by, is sufficient to Justify either of ●heir Ways of Proof.  
The next Thing I take Notice of, is his Attempt to Invalidate our Old Translations in general, As being not made so much from the Original, as from other Latin Versions; for which he citys Wilkins, in his Gift of Preaching, p. 48. And because he thinks to Effect his Design under this Man's Name, it will be needful to Consider, what Wilkins says about the Latin Versions: For if our Old Translations were made more from the Latin than the Original, yet if the Latin were made from the Original, than our Old Translations made from the Latin, where they exactly agree with the Original, are still to be acknowledged to be o● good Authority. Now Wilkins mentions five Chief Translations of the Bible into Latin.  
" 1. The Vulgar, commonly ascribed to Hierom  
2. Pagnine's Translation, which is of good Antiquity and Esteem, Published An. Dom● 1523. altered by Arias Montanus in the interlineary Bible.  
3. The Tigurine Translation, begun by Leo Juda● and finished by other Reformed Divines, An. Dom● 1543. Published by Robert Stephens, 1557. wit● Notes annexed, which he ascribes to Vatablus.  
4. The Translation of Sebastian Castalio, whic● is for the most part very Elaborate and Subtle but not without too much Affectation of Elegance Published first Anno Dom. 1551.  
5. The Latin Version, which is in most commo● use amongst us, being performed by those Learned Men, Fran. Junius, and Eman. Tremellius, wit● very great Diligence and Judgement.  
The Latin Translations [of the New Testaments are chief of three Kind's; Namely, 1. The V●gar. 2. Erasmus. 3. Bez● Which are all commonly known, and in their sever●● kinds of good Repute 
* Gift of Preaching, p. 35. Edit. 4. .  
Now the Vulgar Latin translates Hymnesantes by Hymno dicto, an Hymn or Praise being said; which R. A. does not at first seem much to except against, nor 
* Essay, p. 19  Those of our Old Translations, which render it, They said Grace, or They Praised God. And the Reason is plain, He has an Art to make Saying and Singing of an Hymn Identical Phrases, and would persuade us, that Saying of Grace, or Praising God, was performed by Singing; because those Old Translations do not tell us, nor so much as intimate the contrary. But supposing our Old Translators intended to intimate the contrary, than the 
† Appendix, p. 63.  Old Translations in General are presently censured, as having mistaken the Sense of ●he Words, and that Censure backed with the Authority of Wilkins, and all to avoid the Force of that Rendering, which he cannot but know makes directly against him. But now Wilkins does not charge all our Old Translations as R. A. does; his Words are these, For the Translations of the Bible into our own Vulgar Tongue, there are some of these so Ancient as Henry the 8th. his Time, by Tindal and Matthews; but these Translations were not so much from the Original Hebrew and Greek, as from some other Latin Version 
‖ Gift of Preaching, p. 36. Edit. 4. : Where observe, this Author speaks but ●f two Translations, viz. of Tindal and Matthews, ●o made, tho' R. A. brings the Old Translations ●n General under that Imputation. I have no Design in this Discourse to plead for the Old Tran●ations, any further than they accord with the Original; where they do so accord, as I apprehend ●hey do in the Rendering of Mat. 26.30. I think they ought so far to be defended against all Assailants.  
Lastly, R. A. tells us, that Hymno Dicto, which the Old Translators might take to signify no mor● than an Hymn being said, doth indeed properly signify an Hymn being Sung; which I cannot let pa● without a Remark, because tho' Dicere, to Say, o● Speak, when used with a Word that signify Poetical Composure, may sometimes signify to Sing as the Dauphin Interpreters of Virgil and Horac● and before them, Notae Variorum inform us: Yet th● Use of the Word is Metonymical and Improper and not Proper, nor General, as R. A. Affirms. Fo●  
1. I do not find in Cooper, Littleton, or the Cambridge-Dictionary, that Dicere has any such Signification at all. We well know the Liberty that Poe● often use, in extending the Signification both o● Words and Phrases; thus Agmen, a Troop or Brigad● joined with Aquarum, is put for a Violent Shower Glomerare, to Wind round as Thread upon a bottom joined with Tempestatem, signifies to Gather a Storm [Virg. Georg. l. 1. v. 322, 323.] Ludus, Play or Pastime, put for War, [Hor. Carm. l. 1. Ode 2. v. 37. Deterere, to Bruise or Beat out as in Threshing, joyne● with Laudes, signifies to Diminish one's Praises. [Ibi● Od. 6. v. 11, 12.] Sacramentum, a Military Oath, pu● for a Soldier. [Juven. Sat. 16. v. 36.] but then w● must not from this Poetical Liberty infer a Pro●priety of their Signification.  
2. As Dicere, when used with a Word that signifies Poetical Composure, does not properly signify to Sing; so 'tis not generally so used. Fo● the General Use is to Say, Speak, Describe, Pronounce, Rehearse, Thus Dicere Facta in Virgi● [Eclog. 4. v. 54. and 8. v. 8.] is too Writ the History of ones Acts, as Cooper expounds it. Dicere Pugnas, [Georg. l. 3. v. 46.] is too Proclaim Wars, a Ogilby translates it. Dicere Spectacula, Deuces, More● Studia, Populos, Praelia, [Georg. l. 4. v. 3, 4, 5.] i● to Speak of, or Describe Shows, Generals, Manners▪ Studies, People, battles. Novissima Verba dicere [Aeneid, l. 6. v. 231.] to utter the last Words. Dicere Bella, Acies, [Aeneid. l. 7. v. 41, 42.] is to speak of Wars, Armies. Dicere Carmen, [Hor. Carmen Seculare, lib. Epod. v. 8.] is to Pronounce Verse, vid. Littleton's Dictionary. Dicere laudes [Hor. ibid. v. the last] is to Praise, Brome's Hor. Eng. So Dicere versus in Cooper is to Speak Verses, Precantia verba dicere, to entreat. And Carmina dicere tacitâ voce, [Ovid. Metam. l. 9 v. 301, 302.] is too Speak Charms or Verses with a still or low voice. Multitudes of Examples more might be produced, if there were Occasion, to show, that Dicere, when used in Poetical Composure, doth not properly, nor generally signify to Sing, as R. A. pretends: But these Instances, I hope, may be satisfactory. But suppose they should not be so, the Citations out of Virgil and Horace by R. A. will not help him at all in his rendering Hymno dicto, an Hymn being Sung; unless he could prove Christ used Poetical Composure, Mat. 26.30. which will be hard for him there to do, except the Words were set down wherewith Christ Praised his Father, which are not by the Evangelists.  
R. A. They [that is, the Translators] are much less guilty of Contradicting the Text, by rendering the Words, they Sung, instead of they Lamented, as is ignorantly (to say no worse) intimated by a late Querist. I have searched all Places where this 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Word is used by the Seventy, and can find nothing in them for this Suggestion: And tho' any Instance should be found in profane Writers of its being thus used, by way of Antithesis, yet I think it would be very unreasonable therefore to take it in such a strained Sense in the Scripture. Essay, p. 19, 20.  
I grant, the Word may possibly be used in that Sense, in some Profane Writers, by way of Antithesis, or if he had rather Antiphras● (that I may escape the Correction he threate● me with) but yet being never so used by t● LXX, whom the New-Testament Writers generally follow in the use of Words, I can't b● conclude it groundless, to fancy such a Sense 〈◊〉 it in the Evangelists. Vindication, p. 27.  
Answ. 'Tis well R. A. hath upon second Thought corrected himself, for Antithesis is either the putting of one Letter for another, as Ollis for Illis: As▪ Igneus est ollis vigour & coelestis Origo. Virg. Aeneid. l. 6. v. 730.  
Or the Mutual Opposition of Contraries in ● Sentence; as, Parvula (nam Exemplo est) magni formica labori Hor. Serm. l. 1. Sat. 1. v. 33.  
But Antiphrasis is, when a Word hath a contrary Meaning to the Original Sense of it; as, Parc● quòd nemini parcant, Calep. Diction.  
And it had been no less commendable for hi● to have withdrawn his Charge of Ignorance against the late Querist: For th● Querist only asks, Whether th● Term 
* The Axe at the Root of the Innovation of Singing. p. 8.  Hymnesantes doth no● as strongly imply, that the Lamented, as that they Sung and Rejoiced? An● the Reasons of the Query are these; Greek Write● do sometimes use the Word by Antiphrasis, to Mour● or Lament, as Suidas, Eustathius, Stephanus, Scapul● Constantine and Sylburgius tell us: And the Improbability of the Disciples being in a Singing Frame a● this Time, for their Hearts were greatly troubled when Christ told them, that One of them should bett● him, Mat. 26.21. and this was at Supper, just before he broke Bread with them, and not long before he was betrayed: So that if the Word should be taken here for Mourning or Lamenting, I see no Inconvenience or Absurdity that will ensue thereupon: Nor will it follow, that Acts 16.25. and Heb. 2.12. are so to be taken, tho' the Word is the same: For we do not read, that Paul and Silas were in a sorrowful Frame; but the Text says expressly, that the Disciples were, Mat. 26.22. And Dr. Owen applies Heb. 2.12. to Christ's Rejoicing after his Passion; He no sooner was delivered (says he) from his Sufferings, but as he lands upon the Shore from that Tempest wherein he was tossed in his Passion, he cries out, I will declare thy Name unto my Brethren, in the midst of the Congregation will I Sing Praises unto thee. See his Expos. upon the Place.  
Nor does R. A's. Reply to Dr. Russel, Vindicat. ●. 27. and Appendix, p. 65. take off the Force of the Dr's Answer: For he himself grants, after Christ's powerful Arguments, contained in the 14th. 15th. ●nd 16th. Chapters of John, and his most ravishing ●rayer, Chap. 17. to Comfort and Revive the Disciples Minds, that some of them, were after again seized with Sorrow, when they beheld him in his dismal agony, Luke 22.45. Appendix, p. 65. Where, tho' ●e would insinuate that the Disciples were raised to Frame of Singing, sometime between Christ's saying to them at Supper, One of you shall Betray me, and ●is Bloody Agony; yet there is not one Circumstance 〈◊〉 all the Context but mere Conjecture, to ground ●is Insinuation upon: And I think 'tis a safer Way 〈◊〉 draw such Inferences from Scripture, both with ●espect to Doctrine and Practice, as the Context ●ill bear; than to lay down positive Conclusions ●rst, and then strive for Proof, not from express scripture, or any Certain and Necessary Consequences therefrom; but an Ambiguous and Contingent Interpretation thereof.  
That the LXX use not Hymneo to Mourn or L●ment, and the New-Testament Writers general follow them in the use of Words, will make littl● against the Querist or the Dr. For there are man Words in the New-Testament that are neither use in the LXX, nor are of Greek Extraction, but ar● Latin Words, clothed in Greek Characters, wit● some little Variation to sui● them to that Language, as 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  So●darion, Simicinthion, Acts 19.12▪ Kensos', Mat. 22.17. Denarion● Mat. 20.13. Kodrantes, Mat. 5▪ 26. Koustodia, Mat. 27.65. Pra●torion, v. 27. Makellon, 1 Cor▪ 10.25. Legeon, Mar. 5.9. Lention, John 13.4. wit● several more. And there are some used, both b● the LXX, and the Writers of the N. Testament and yet are sometimes used by the Former in a Sens● much different from the Latter. For Example, 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Hypostasis which in the N. Testament signifies Substance, Person, Confidence, Confident Boasting, is used by the LXX. for a Burden, Deut 1.12. for a Garrison, 1 Sam. 14.4. for Age, Psal 39.5. and for Standing, Psal. 69.2▪ So 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Psyche, which in the N. Testament signifies the Life, Soul, Mind, Heart, i● used by the LXX. for a Dead Body Numb. 9.6, 7, 10. And 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Baptizo, whic● signifies to Dip or Plung, is used by th● LXX. to Affright, Isa. 21.4. And therefore tho' Hymneo should not be used by the Seventy to Mourn or Lament; and the Writers of the N. Testament do generally follow them in the Use of Words: Yet for as much as we see they do not always so, there is room enough left for an Exception, in this no-less than i● the Instances given, all Circumstances being considered; unless the N. Testament Writers did constantly tread in their Track.  
But says R. A. When They tell us, that (Hymneo) signifies to Lament and Complain, it hath been also before evidenced, that they intent not all kind of Lamenting and Complaining, but only that which is expressed by Lamenting and Complaining Songs; and so this Lamenting and Complaining is not opposed to, but inclusive of Singing. Appendix, p. 64.  
Answ. If R. A. would stand to the Determination of the Lexicographers, which he refers to in ●he Relative [They], there would soon be an End of the Dispute: For 'tis manifest from them, that Authors do also use the Word to express Lamenting and Complaining, without Singing. Thus 
* Lex.  Scapula and Constantine tell us 'tis used by Plato and Sophocles, as 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Plat. Epist. 7.  Hymnein tauta, to Lament these ●hings, and 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sophoc. Trag. Electra.  Hymneseis kaka, thou shalt Lament thy Miseries. He that thinks these Authors ●ntend such a Lamenting, as is only expressed by Lamenting and Complaining Songs, may easily, by consulting of them, satisfy himself of the contrary.  
Sect. 7. I come now to the remaining Part of ●y Undertaking, motioned p. 61, 62. which is to produce my Testimonies, to Prove the Primary and Proper Signification of Hymneo, to be Simply to Praise. And tho' this may seem Actum agere, to be a doing again of that which is done already, in the Examination and Confutation of R. A's. Evidence for the contrary Sense of the Word: Yet the former Sections being spent, mostly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in demolishing of his Mistaken Structure, the present Work will appear both Necessary and Orderly. And that we may not labour in the dark R. A. and those of his Party have done, a few thi● shall be premised, in Order to set the Controversy in a clear Light; and by which as certain Rul● or Tests of Probation, we may both Distinguish a Judge aright.  
Our Opponents strenuously maintain, that ●wor● Word signifies Primarily and Properly to Sing Prai● We say, tho' the Word is so used sometimes; y● this is only a Secondary and Improper Signification of and the Primary and Proper is Simply to Praise. 〈◊〉 which Senses of the Word, as 'tis pleaded for both Sides Pro and Con, each Party c●te Testimonies out of Authors: Now there must be so● Rules to Distinguish and Determine, which Se● is Primary and Proper, and which Secondary a Improper; or there may be a continual Allegati● of Authorities, One against Another; seeing t● Word is used sometimes to Sing Praise, as well Simply to Praise. I therefore propose these following Rules to Consideration:  
Rule 1. If a Word hath both a Simple and Compound Signification, 'tis most Reasonable to Conclude, that the Simple is P imary and Proper, a● the Compound Secondary and Improper; and the R●●son is, because all Compounds, whether in Natu● or Art, necessarily arise from Simples. Thus Natural Philosophy, Corpora simplicia sunt prio● Mixtis, Simple Bodies are before Mixed; the Element as Earth, Air, Fire and Water, are before though Bodies that are made out of them. And in Grammar; Letters, which are as Simples, or Elements that Art, are first, and then Syllables, Words, Sentences.  
Rule 2. It being generally acknowledged, th● no Words signify Naturally, but by Imposition an● Institution; therefore the Usage of Authors, th● are most Ancient and Well-approved, are most likely to lead us to the First Institution, and consequently to the Primary and Proper Sense of them.  
These are the Rules I Propose to Consideration; against which, I think, there can lie no just Exception; and therefore shall see how applicable they are to the Matter in Hand.  
1. 'Tis most Rational to conclude, that the Primary and Proper Signification of Hymneo is Simply to Praise, or to Praise without Sing; because, to Praise is a Simple Signification, but to Sing Praise is Mixed and Compounded; which must therefore be Secondary, in respect of the other.  
2. Seeing no Words signify Naturally, but by Imposition and Institution, and that the Usage of Authors that are most Ancient and Well-approved, is most likely to lead us to the First Institution, and so to the Primary and Proper Sense of them; I shall therefore prove the Primary and Proper Signification of Hymneo, is Simply to Praise:  
1. From Ancient Heathen Greek Writers.  
2. From the Septuagint and Apocrypha.  
3. From the best Greek Lexicographers, both Ancient and Modern.  
4. From many Learned Translators of, and Commentators upon Mat. 26.30. and Acts 16.25.  
First, From Ancient Heathen Greek, Writers; viz. Homer, Hesiod, Herodotus, Thucydides, Isocrates, Xenophon, Plato, Plutarch, Herodian.  
1. Homer is very Ancient; 
* Tuscul. Quaest.  Cicero makes him contemporary with Lycurgus, and 
† Great Histor. Geograph. & Poet. Diction.  Hierom places him at the Year of the World 3179. 
‖ De Poet. Graec.  Vossius at 3039. and 
(a) Tab. Chronolog.  Littleton at 3000. According to which last Account, he was 948 Years before the Birth of Christ, and about the Time of the Prophets Elijah and Elisha. In his Book, Entitled, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hynmno● Hymns, or Praises, it doth plainly appear, tha● Hymneo doth Primarily and Properly signify Simply 〈◊〉 Praise. For,  
1. He useth other Words to express the Act of Singing by, as 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Aedo, 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Ado, 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Melpomai; but Hymned is all along used to Praise.  
2. Where ever I find the Word Hymneo used b● Homer, 'tis rendered by the Latin Translator, La●do, Celebro, I Praise Simply: See 
* 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Quomodo enim te laudabo?  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Apollinem laudaverint.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Laudans argentiarcum.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Laudant utique Deorum Dona immortalia, & Hominum aerumnas.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Quo pacto igitur te laudabo?   Hymn. in Apo● v. 19, 158, 178, 190, 19 207. 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mercurium lauda Musa.  In Mercur. v. ● 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Dianam laudat Musa.  In Dian. v. 1. 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Laudat Musa.  Matrem Deor. v. 2. 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Celebrant autem Deos beatos, & longum Olympum.  In Pan. v. 27. 
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  laudare.  In Sc● v. 1.  
3. He sometimes ●seth 
(d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Ode, 
(e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Mope, and frequently 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Aoide, for Cantio, Cantus, Cantilena, Siniging, o● Song: But 
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hymns for Laus, Praise; wher● of many Instances might be produced. I sha● give one that will clea● the Matter beyond Exception. In the 8t● Book of his Odysse● where he relates the Story of Vlysses' Reception by Alcinous and the Phaeacians; among other Directions that Alcinous gives his Queen Arete● about the Entertainment, he orders that Vlyss●● be treated with a Banquet and Singing: Th● Words are these, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
* Odyss. l. 8. v. 429.   
Et Convivio oblectetur, & Cantilenae laudem audience.  
Let him be Delighted with a Banquet, and hear the Praise of a Song.  
And what this Laudatory Song was, Homer tells us a little after, viz. a Song in Praise of the Trojan Horse, and the Greeks Destruction of Troy: Which doth not at all suit with R. A's. Notion of Hymnos, for he restrains it to God, Essay, p. 17, 18. but here 'tis otherwise applied. Again, what an Absurdity would it be, to Render [Aoides Hymnos] according to the Style of him and his Brethren, a Song of Praise of a Song? and yet so it ought to be read, if their Opinion were true; which would be such an insipid Tautology, as would not, I suppose, be very well relished.  
Upon the whole matter than we may conclude, that Hymneo, as used by Homer, signifies Primarily and Properly, Simply to Praise; and Hymnos is Simply, Praise. For tho' he useth both these Words in his Verses, and applies them sometimes to Singing, yet neither the one is used by him to Sing Praise, nor the other for a Song of Praise; but as other Words importing Singing are either joined with them, or so interwoven in the Texture of the Poetry as to help out that Signification. And if any should pretend, that [Aoides Hymnos] is a Phraseological or Figurative Expression; yet that will do no Service, unless they could prove that Aoides is a Super-numerary Word, and of no Signification; which will be hard to do, since 'tis so frequently used by Homer and other Poets, but never insignificantly.  
2. Hesiod is also very Ancient; Philostratus, Velleius Paterculus, and M. Varro, make him Contemporary with Homer; but Porphyrius places him 100, and Solinus 130 Years after: See Phillips ' Theatrum Poetarum.  
Hesiod makes the same Distinction that we have before observed in Homer: Fo● he expresseth the Act of Singing by 
* Theogon. v. 1, 34, 75.  Aeido, and 
† Ibid. v. 66.  Melpomai, and a Song by 
‖ Ibid. v. 22, 44, 60, 83, 104.  Aeide; but the Act o● Praising by 
(a) Op. & Dier. l. 1. v. 2.  Hymneo. And that Primary and Proper Sense of Hymneo is Simply to Praise he hath given us his Mind a● clearly, as tho' he had been chosen Umpire in the Controversy. I will recite his Words at large, that every one may make a● Estimate for himself.  
— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theogon v. 47, 48.  
— Jovem Deorum Patrem atque etiam Hominum  
Incipientesque laudant Deae, & cessantes a Cantu.  
— The Muses both beginning [to Sing] and ceasing from Singing, Praise Jupiter, etc.  
Here he makes a manifest Difference between Singing of Praise, and Simple Praising: For tho' he ascribes Singing of Praise to the Muses, which is expressed v. 44. by 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Celebrant Cantilenâ.  Kleiousin● Aoide, They Praise with a Song; yet he doth not here necessarily comprehend it in the Word Hymneo; for in saying they Praise, when they cease from Singing, nothing can be more plain than that Hymning doth not necessarily include Singing; and consequently, Singing of Praise is not its Pimary and Proper Signification.  
3. Herodotus, an Ancient Greek Writer in Prose, whom Tully calls the Father of History, and placed by 
* Tabula Chronolog.  Littleton at the Year of the World 3508 ●bout 440 Years before the Birth of Christ, useth the Word Hymneo in the Sense we contend for. Thus 
† Lex,  Constantine (as we have noted before, p. 69.) renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymneatai, from him, Celebrati sunt, They were ●raised: Which according to Stephanus, is in Prose Simply so.  
4. Thucydides, who wrote the History of the Peloponnesian War, in Greek Prose, lived about the Year of the World 
‖ Littleton Tab. Chronolog.  3519. about 429 Years before the Birth of Christ, and was contemporary with the Prophets Haggai and Zachary, gives us the same Signification of the Word that Herodotus doth. Thus 
* De Bello Peloponn. l. 1. p. 15. G. L. ex Interpret. Laur. Vallae, Edit. Francofurti, 1594.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hym●kasi peri auton, is translated by Laurentius Valla, Celebrârunt ●eas, They have praised them. And 
† Ibid. l. 2. p. 126.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hai gar ten polin hymnesa, hai ton de, kai ton toionde aretai ekosmesan. Nam istorum, & his similium [Virorum] Virtutes civitatem [rebus illis] ornârunt, quas ego jam laudavi; The Virtues or Valour of these and such like Men, adorned the City with those things which I have already Praised. That is, the Historian himself Praised them without Singing. So that his Use of the Word Hymneo apparently denotes the Simple Act of Praising, and consequently it's Primary and Proper Signification, according to Rule 1.  
5. Isocrates, one of the most Famous Orators of Greece, born at Athens and flourished 
* Littleton ubi supra, & Helvic. Chronol.  An. Mundi, 3554. before the Birth of Christ 394. about the Time of 
† Chap. 7.  Ezara's going to Jerusalem, is another punctual Evidence for us: Thus speaking of Hercules, he faith, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Orat. ad Philip.  Hoi men alloi te● andrian hymnountes anton kaitous athlous aparithmountes d●atelousi, There are some wh● continually Praise his Valour, and Reckon up his Labours. So mentioning the Troja● War, he saith, 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Evagoras.  Hypo panton anthropon hymnoumenon, It was Celebrated or Praised of all Men So speaking of the Adulteries of the feigned Heathen-Goddesses he saith, 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Helenae Laudatio.  Hos kalon onton to● pepragmenon, hymneisthai mallon e siopasthai peri auto● eboulethesan. They chose rather to have them Praised as things well done, than to be suppressed in Silence. And of the Greeks, who conquered Troy, and of Minos, Rhadamanthus, and Aeacus, (contemporary with Hercules and Theseus, he saith, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Panathenaicus.  Hymnoumenon ep●tais aretais tautavis, They were Praised for these Virtues. Now that the Word Hymneo is used by Isocrates, Simply to Praise, is evident not only from the Context; but also from his indifferent Acceptation of it for 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Evagoras.  Enkomiazo, and 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ibid.  Epaineo, both which are well known not to signify Primarily to Sing Praise, but Simply to Praise.  
6. Xenophon, a Native of Athens, and who lived 
* Helvic. Theat. Histor. & Chronolog.  An. Mundi, 3561. (about the Time that 
† Chap. 2.  Nehemiah came to Jerusalem) 387 Years before the Nativity of Christ, useth the Word Simply to Praise; an Example whereof 
‖ Chabotij Praelect. in Hor. Poem. Tom. 1. p. 6.  Gaza, in Cato Major produceth out of Xenophon's 
(a) Which Book Columella saith, Cicero turned into Latin. Vid. Calep. I find these Words, in Cic. de Senectute, Quàm copiosè ab eo agricultura laudatur?  Oeconomicus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hoson oun philotimos pros autou georgia hymneitai; Quam igitur studiosè ab ipso celebratur agricultura? How studiously doth he Praise or Commend Husbandry? From whence who can but conclude, that the Simple, and so the Primary and Proper Signification is to Praise without Singing?  
7. Plato, born also Athens, and flourished An. Mundi, 
* Helvic. ubi supra.  3582. before Christ was born 366 Years, is a clear Evidence in the present Case: For speaking of Temperance, he saith, 
† De Repub. l. 2.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Pants ex henos stomatos hymnousin hos kalon; Omnes uno o'er celebrant ut bonum, All Men Commend or Praise it as good.  
8. Plutarch of Chaeronea (who lived An. Christi 104. as 
* Ubi supra.  Helvicus and others inform us) useth the Word to Praise Simply, or without Singing: In his Precepts for the preserving of Health, he hath two Passages very express and full to our Purpose; the One is this,  
As Plato was wont to ask himself after the Miscarriage of other Men he had been with, Am not I also such an One? So ought a Man to take Care by his Neighbour's misfortunes, and diligently to beware that he do not fall into them, and being forced to keep his Bed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymnesei pothon ten polytimeton hygieian, there Praise and Commend precious Health above all things, wishing and desiring it again.  
The Other as followeth, The declining of all Business, tho' never so honourable, signified nothing to Epicurus and his Followers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Pros ten hymnoumenen sarkos eustatheian, as to that so much Praised or Commended good Habit of Body.  
9 Herodian, a Grammarian and Historian of Alexandria, and who lived (saith 
* Ibid.  Helvicus) An. Christi, 224. delivers the same Sense of the Word which the  Authors do; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
† Lib. 1. Sect. 43.  Tun men kolakon eye andreias doxan auta hymnounton; 
‖ Angelus Politianus Interp.  Ob quae Studia adulatores eum fortitudinis gloriâ celebrabant, For which Studies (speaking of Commodus the Roman Emperor) his Parasites Fraised or Extolled him with the Glory of Fortitude.  
If now R. A. should reply, that all these Testimonies import only the Consequent and Figurative Sense of the Word, and not the Primary and Proper Signification; I suppose his bare Assertion will be taken for no Answer by any, who understand the Greek Tongue, and are both capable of Judging when a Word is used Properly, and when Improperly by an Author, and will be Impartial in delivering their Opinion. For the Simple Signification of all Words (as was said before) must necessarily be the Primary and Proper Sense thereof.  
Secondly, As we have the Testimony of these Ancient Heathen Greek Writers, that the Primary and Proper Signification of Hymneo is Simply to Praise; so we have the Concurrence of the Septuagint, a Name commonly given to the Seventy two Learned Jews, who translated the Old Testament out of Hebrew into Greek, at the Request of Ptolemy Philadelphus, the Son of Lagus King of Egypt, An. Mundi 3698 (as 
* Tab. Chronolog.  Littleton), 3699. (as 
† Thesaur. Chronolog.  Alstedius tells us) about 250 Years before the Birth of Christ. See their Testimonies cited, and the Objection against them fully Answered, p. 76. as also those Places in the Old Testament, where Hymnos is rendered by our Translators, Simply Praise, p. 70, 71.  
Consentaneous hereunto are also the Books called Apocrypha, who tho' not received by the Jews into the Canon of the Bible, nor allowed to be read in their Public Synagogues or Temple by the Priests; yet they may (I hope) as well be alleged as any other Authorities, to prove the Sense of a Word; for which, and no other End, they are here cited. The first Instance I shall give is in the Song of the three Children, from v. 27. to the End; where Hymneo is used above thirty times Simply to Praise. For in all the Places where the Word occurs, both Montanus and Junius have rendered it by Lando, and our Translators to Praise. Which makes me admire, why these last should call it a Song, when the Title in Greek is [
* Apocrypha at the End of the LXX. Printed at Cambridge in the Year 1665.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tun trion paidon Ainesis,] The Praise or Thanksgiving of the three Children; and there is not any thing to countenance it, either from Hym●●o so oft there used, or from the Version of it by themselves, or the Latin Translators. Another is in Ecclesiasticus 39.35. where the Propriety of the Word is expressed by Montanus and Junius, and our English Version, Simply to Praise. See also Wisd. 10.20. & 1 Mac. 4.33. And to show us also that Hymnos doth not Primarily and Properly signify a Song of Praise, nor is restrained to God as the Object; the Title of the 44th. Chap. of Ecclesiasticus, is [
* Apocrypha, Ibid.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Pateron hymnos], the Praise of the Fathers. And our Translation gives the Contents of the Chap. agreeably thereunto, viz. The Praise of certain holy Men, of Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; The Praise Simply, not a Song of Praise: For the Chapter is a brief Recital of their Praises, without any Word or Words importing the Singing of them, as is manifest from the whole, and particularly the first and seventh Verses; Let us now Praise Famous Men, and our Fathers that begat us. There be of them that have left a Name behind them, that their Praises might be reported.  
If it should be Objected, that the Words Hymneo and Hymnos are also otherwise used in Judith 16.13. Eccles. 47.8. 1 Mac. 13.47, 51. 2 Mac. 10.7, 38. and there imply Praising, or the Praise of God by Singing; I readily Answer they do, and therefore was not willing to pass them over in Silence, as tho' these or the like Instances made against us, and so be thought to conceal them on purpose from the Unlearned Reader. For they do not in the least either Strengthen R. A's. Sense of them, or Weaken mine; for 'tis the Primary and Proper Signification that I plead for, which is Simply to Praise, or Praise, not denying them that Secondary and Improper Sense, which R. A. without any good Ground or Evidence, would fain set up as their Primary and Proper Sense. For this Rule is unexceptionably true, The Simple Signification is always prior to the Mixed and Compound.  
Thirdly, We have the best Greek Lexicographers, both Ancient and Modern, atttesting to the Truth of our Signification of the Word, viz. Phavorinus, Hesychius, Suidas, Budaeus, Stephanus, Scapula, Constantine.  
1. Phavorinus, who lived An. Christi 101. (as we are told by 
* Ubi supra.  Helvicus) hath these 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Lex.  Words, Hymnein legetai to euphemein kai exairein, kai epi theion kai anthropinon tithemenon. Legetai hymnein kai to adein. To Hymn is said to Praise and Extol, and is applied to things Divine and Humane. To Hymn is said also to Sing. This, I think, is as full an Evidence that the Primary and Proper Signification of Hymneo is Simply to Praise, as can be desired. For tho' the Order of Words doth not always prove the Priority and Propriety of their Signification; yet here it must be acknowledged so to do, because the Author manifestly ascribes Simple Praising to Hymneo, as it's First and Proper Sense, and then adds, It is also said to Sing: Thereby expressly showing, that to Sing is the Secondary and Figurative Acceptation of it.  
2. Hesychius; there were several of this Name, and some make it uncertain at what Time he lived; but 
‖ Ubi supra.  Helvicus and Littleton place him at the Year of Christ 499. He in his Lexicon says but a little of this Word, yet so much as is sufficient to inform us, that it's Primary and Proper Signification is Simply to Praise. For the First Sense he gives of 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Lex.  Hymnei, He Hymneth, is Eulogei, He Blesseth or Praiseth, and after this Interpretation, he adds, Adei, H● Singeth. And in an Ancient Gree● and Latin Lexicon, at the End of some of 
* In Philoxeni Lex. Graeco. Lat. Vet. cum Notis Vulcanij.  Cyril's Works, 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Laudifico.  Hymno is rendered Simply I Praise.  
3. Suidas, whom 
‖ Chartophylax Eccles.  Cave places at the Year of Christ, 1081. and 
* De Histor. Graecis.  Vossius at the Year 1090. hath several Instances to our Purpose, as they are rendered in Latin by 
† Vid. Lex. pro sequent.  Aemilius Portus Cretensis. Thus 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Celebrare.  Hymnein is translated to Praise; 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Te celebrat.  Hymnei se, He Praiseth thee; 
(b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ut in luce opera, Domine, te opificem omniumque rerum Creatorem celebrent.  Hos en photitae erga hymnei se kyrie ton demiourgon; That in thy Light, O Lord, thy Works Praise thee, the Cretor of all things. 
(c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Celebrabis.  Hymneseis, Thou shalt Praise: And 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hymneito, Let him Glorify or Praise.  
4. Budaeus, who is placed by 
* Ubi supra.  Helvicus and Littleton at the Year of Christ, 1532. sets down in his Lexicon the Various Acceptations of Hymneo, and for the First puts Dico hymnum, I Say an Hymn or Praise; and then Hymnos canto, cano vel dico Laudes, I Sing or Say Hymns or Praises. And that to Say an Hymn or Praise, and not to Sing it, is the Primary and Proper Signification, we have Reason to Conclude was his Judgement; both from his placing the Words, and the Examples he brings from 
† See his Words, p. 105.  Plato, and 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to Praise Husbandry. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to Praise a City. Thucyd.  Others, to Confirm the First Acceptation, and not giving so much as one Instance for the Second.  
5. Henricus Stephanus, who was born at Paris, in the 16th. Century, and is placed at the Year 1563. by Helu. and Littleton, Famous for his Lexicon, Entitled, Thesaurus Graecae Linguae, The Treasure the of the Greek Tongue, Printed in three Volumes in Folio, saith, Hymneo is the same with 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Hydo or 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Thesaur. Graec. Ling.  Hydeo; and the First Sense he gives of Hydo is Celebro, I Celebrate or Praise. He further tells us, that Hymneo is wont to be taken in Prose Simply, for Praedico, Laudibus Celebro, Laudo, I Praise, as the Words signify; and then quotes Plato and Herodian, whose Testimonies are set down, p. 105, 106.  
6. Scapula, who hath abridged Stephanus' Thesaurus, and lived An. Christi, 1579. as appears by the Date of his Epistle to the Magistrates of Bern, need here be cited at large; because his Testimony is the same. See also p. 64. where I have cleared Scapula's Sense of Hymneo, from R. A's. Mistaken Representation.  
7. Constantine, a Native of Caen in France, Contemporary with Stephanus and Scapula, in giving the Signification of Hymneo, follows Budaeus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, step by step; and therefore I refer the Reader to Budaeus himself just before, and to the Account given of Constantine, p. 69. And so I pass in the  
Fourth and last Place, to the Testimonies of several Learned Translators of, and Commentators upon Mat. 26.30. and Acts 16.25. which I shall draw into as narrow a Compass as is possible, because much hath been spoken already to Satisfy the Doubting, Inform the Ignorant, and Convince the Contrary Minded, (if not Pertinacious of Error) about the Primary and Proper Signification of Hymneo, viz. that 'tis Simply to Praise.  
Mat. 26.30 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymnesantes.  

* Hierom, Beda, Montanus, and the Latins generally.  Hymno dicto, an Hymn or Praise being said.  

† Syr. Translat.  Laudes dixerunt, they Said or spoke Praise.  

| Arab. Verse. in a Lapide.  Laudem dederunt, they gave Praise.  

(a) Interpr. Theophilac. a Lapide.  Cum hymnum dixissent, when they had said an Hymn or Praise.  

(b) Novarinus.  Quum dixissent Laudes, when they had spoken Praises.  

(c) Interpr. Euthymij, Castalio.  Dictis Laudibus, Praises being spoken.  

(d) Eman. Sa. Tirinus.  Gratijs Deo acts, Thanks being given to God.  

(e) Pers. Verse. in Pool's Synops. Crit.  Et Laudes dixerunt, and they spoke Praise.  

(f) Tindal's Bible, with Coverdales', and some more.  When they had said Grace,  

(g) Bible with Cranmers Preface to it. Printed 1585. & 1591.  And when they had Praised God.  
Acts 16.25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymnoun ton Theon.  

* Interpr. Chrysostomi. Montan. Castalio, Lorinus. Marlorat. Aretius, Leusden.  Laudabant Deum, they Praised God.  

† Beda,  Adorantes Deum, Hymnum dicebant, Praying to God, they spoke an Hymn.  

‖ Tremel. e Syrâ Translatione.  Glorificabant Deum, they Glorified God.  

(a) In locum.  Lorinus tells us, that Cyprian expounds it, by Gratias agere, to give Thanks; and 
(b) Non puto modulato nunc hymno usos Apostolos, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est simpliciter laudes praedicare, etiam sine cantu. Lorinus ibid.  thinks that Paul and Silas did not Sing at this Time; and says, that Hymnein is Simply to Praise, even without Singing.  
Hymnein generally signifies (saith 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in genere significant laudare, Gratias agere, hymnum dicere. Harm. Evang. de Pass. etc. Christi. p. 3.  Gerhard) to Praise, to give Tanks, to Say an Hymn or Praise. And concludes, speaking of Christ's Praising the Father, Mar. 14. 26. 
† Non potest ex eo fimiter probari, quòd Christus hymnum illum decantarent. Gerhard ibid.  It cannot be firmly proved from the Word, that Christ Sang that Hymn or Praise.  
The same for Substance say Marlorat. Erasmus, Musculus, Maldonat. and L. Brugensis, upon Mat. 26.30. For which, see p. 78, 79. where their Words are set down at large.  
And thus, according to my Promise, p. 60. have I given R. A. a very Fair Trial about the Primary and Proper Signification of the Greek Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymneo, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hymnos; wherein I have abundantly proved, that the One doth Primarily and Properly signify, Simply to Praise; and the Other Simply Praise. I should not have alleged so many Authors, (the Search into which hath been attended with no small Travel and Difficulty) nor spent so many Pages to clear the Signification of these two Words, from the Dust cast upon them; but that R. A. gave Occasion to this Trouble, by asserting, without good Grounds, and consequently without Success, that his Interpretation is attested by the concurrent Evidence of the most Learned in the Greek Tongue; which upon Inquiry manifestly appears to be otherwise.   

CHAP. III. Is a Reply to R. A's. Answer, to the Second Objection against his Argument for Singing, from the Example of Christ, Mat. 26.30.  
THE First Objection (to R. A's. Argument, to prove, That 
* Viz. With the Outward Voice: For he allows of No Singing properly without the Extension of the Voice. Essay, p. 30.  Singing to the Praise of God, is the Duty of every Christian, from the Example of Christ,) which is, That the Word Sung is not in the Original, but added by the Translators, I have largely defended in the foregoing Chapter, against all that carries the Semblance of an Answer; and come now to Consider and Reply, to what he hath returned to the Second Objection.  
Sect. 1. R. A. 'Tis further Objected, Tha● tho' it should be granted, (as it must) that our Lord indeed Sang a Hymn; yet 'tis presumed that it might peculiarly belong to the Passover and so be no more Obligatory upon us, from the Example of Christ, than the Passover itself.  
Answ. To clear this doubt, seriously weig● these following Things.  
1. That both the Passover and the Lords-Supper had a Special and Peculiar Respect to th● Sufferings of Christ for our Redemption. Tha● the Passover had such a peculiar respect there to, appears, in that the Apostle hereupon 
* 1 Cor. 5.7.  calls Christ our Passover sacrificed for us. And that the Lord's-Supper hath so, is manifest, in that we are commanded therein constantly 
† 1 Cor. 11.26.  To show forth the Lord's Death. And it being thus, I can see no necessity to determine, that this Hymn was Sung by our Saviour, upon the Occasion of either of these, exclusive of the other: Being both, as respecting the Glorious Work of our Redemption, matter of the highest Praise and Rejoicing. Essay, p. 21, 22.  
Reply 1. in the Objection he hath inserted a Parenthesis, with these Words, (as it must) intimating, it must be granted that our Lord indeed Sang an Hymn; which I think he is too positive in, for these Reasons.  
1. Because the Word Hymneo doth Primarily and Properly signify Simply I Praise, as is fully proved in the last Chapter, from Ancient Heathen Greek Writers; from the Septuagint and Apocrypha; from the best Greeks Lexicographers, both Ancient and Modern; and from many Learned Translators of, and Commentators upon Mat. 26.30. and Acts 16.25. and therefore doth not certainly or necessarily infer, that our Lord indeed Sang an Hymn.  
2. Because, there are some Circumstances related by the Evangelists, both of the Disciples and Christ himself, which import, they were not in a Singing Frame at this Time: For while they were at Supper, 'tis said of the Disciples, 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Lupoumenoi sphodra, Contristati vehementer, they were exceeding sorrowful, Mat. 26.22. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Erxanto lupeist thai, ceperunt contristari, They to be sorrowful, Mark 14.19. And the very same Night not long after Supper, 'tis said of Christ himself, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉;  Erxato lupeisthai, coepit contristari, he began to be sorrowful, Mat. 26.37. 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Erxato ekthambeisthai, coepit expavescere, he began to be sore amazed, Mar. 14.33. 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Kai ademonein, Et gravissimè angi, And to be very heavy, say both. And My Soul is exceeding sorrowful, Mat. 26.38. Mar. 14.34. The Greek Word is 
(a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Perilupos, Vndiquaque tristis, Sad on every side; thereby signifying, that his Soul with all the Faculties thereof, was surrounded with Grief and Sorrow: All which Circumstances, and the Primary Signification of Hymneo, laid together, do render it very unlikely that they Sang.  
But if it should be Rejoined, that tho' the Disciples were Overwhelmed with Sorrow at Supper, just before Christ's Breaking of Bread; yet he himself was not: For the Evangelists say, it was after Supper that Christ began to be Sorrowful and sore Amazed.  
I Answer, That Christ being a Merciful and Faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, and Touched with the Feeling of our Infirmities, Heb. 2.17. and 4.15. 'tis hard to think, when he saw his poor Disciples exceeding Sorrowful, that he should not Sympathise with them, who hath by his Apostle commanded us, To weep with them that weep, Rom. 12.15. And as to those Places in the Evangelists, which say, He began to be sorrowful and sore amazed, tho' they are mentioned after Supper was ended, yet 'twas not long after Supper: Nor do they purport any more, than some Gradual Increase of his Sorrow, the nearer he was to his Bloody Passion; which is plainly intimated by Mark, He began to be sore amazed, that is, He was under Sorrow before; but now the Waves began to rise higher, and beat more violently upon him. And if we more closely consider Mat. 26.21, 22, 23, 24. and Mar. 14.18, 19, 20, 21. we shall find there is a greater Probability of Christ's being in a Sorrowful, than a Joyful Frame at Supper. The Context lies thus; When Jesus and his Twelve Disciples were Sat, and Eating of the Passover, he tells them that One of them should betray him: This struck them with a Panic Fear, and they Began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him One by One, is it I? His Answer was, It is one of the Twelve, that dippeth with me in the Dish; and then addeth, The Son of Man goeth, as it is written of him, but Woe to that Man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. Now whether this Woe was spoken in Anger or Pity, or in both; viz. in Anger against the Treason, and in Pity to the Soul of the Traitor, for both these Passions appeared in Christ, and the latter most Eminently; I cannot conceive how it could be uttered without Sorrow. For we read, that he was grieved for the hardness of the Pharisees Hearts, at the same time that he beheld them with Anger, Mar. 3.5. And when he foretold the Dreadful Calamities that were then coming (and did afterwards come) upon Jerusalem, for not knowing the Time of her Visitation, with what melting Pity, with what Bowels of Compassion did he Weep over her? If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy Peace! but now they are hid from thine Eyes, Luke 19.41, 42. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the Prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy Children together, even as a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her Wings, and ye would not? Behold your House is left unto you desolate, Mat. 23.37, 38. Now he who was grieved for the Hardened Pharisees, and Melted into Tears over Unbelieving Jerusalem, cannot surely be thought to have no Bowels for an Apostatising Disciple; who tho' he fell by Transgression, yet once was near and dear to Christ; he eat of his Bread and drank of his Cup, and was not only numbered with the Apostles, but also had obtained Part of the same Ministry. If then either the Sorrow of his Disciples, or the Woe denounced against the Man that should betray him, may be conceived to move Pity and Compassion in Jesus; there is a greater Likelihood that he Mourned with the One, and for the Other; than Sung when the One Mourned, and the Other was running into Eternal Perdition. And if Christ did not Sing with his Disciples at this time; which is far more probable, than that he did: Then R. A's First Answer to the Objection carries no Solution in it. For if the Hymn or Praise was not Sung, but Simply Said or Spoke; 'tis no matter whether it appertained to the Passover, or the Lord's Supper, or both.  
3. Methinks he is too positive in Saying, It must be granted, that our Lord indeed Sang an Hymn; because many Learned Men, who were for Common Singing, did yet Hesitate about Christ's Singing an Hymn with his Disciples; telling us, It is not Certain, and the Greek Word doth not necessarily Evince it, as is before taken Notice of more particularly. And the Objection itself doth not grant that Christ Sang, tho' R. A. would have us believe it doth, by his Words (as it must) in the Parenthesis; but supposes if that should be granted, it would yield no Advantage to his Cause, presuming it did peculiarly belong to the Passover, and so was no part of the New Celebration.  
The Special and Peculiar Respect of the Passover and the Lord's Supper, to the Sufferings of Christ for our Redemption, doth not prove that this Hymn or Praise was Sung at all, or upon occasion of either of them. But if for Argument sake, we should suppose, it was Sung, 'tis more probable, it was upon the Account of the Passover, than of the Lords-Supper, because the Jews had such a Custom at the Celebration of the Passover, as Learned Men tell us; and our Saviour who was a Member of the Jewish Church, was Circumcised, Luke 2.21. Brought to Jerusalem, and presented to the Lord, v. 22. and kept the Passover with his Disciples, Mat. 26.18, 19, etc. And tho' the Jews Custom of Singing of an Hymn was not of Divine Appointment, yet forasmuch as he was present at the Feast of Dedication, which was ordained by the Jews themselves, 1 Mac. 4.59. 2 Mac. 10.8. in Remembrance of the New Consecration of the Altar, after it had been Profaned by Antiochus; we may suppose, that if he did Sing at this Time, it was peculiarly and only with respect to the Passover.  
Sect. 2. R. A. But, 2. To suppose that it was Sung only upon the Occasion of the Passover, is altogether groundless; for had it been so, what reason can be rendered why it should not be Sung immediately after it? as 'tis plain it was not. Essay, p. 22.  
Reply 2. I only allow of the Supposition for Argument sake, and upon no other Account; for, I think, there is Authority enough alleged in the former Chapter, to induce us to conclude the Hymn was not Sung. And when he can give a Reason, why 
* 26.29.  Matthew and 
† 14.25.  Mark place those Words of Christ, I will not drink henceforth of the Fruit of the Vine, etc. immediately after the Cup of the Lord's Supper; and 
‖ 22.18.  Luke places them immediately after the Cup of the Passover as appertaining thereunto? He may with Ease resolve the Difficulty. In the mean time, I desire him to remember, that there is a Figure called Trajectio, very frequently used in Scripture, whereby Words and Sentences are Transposed. For which let him consult 
* Annotat. in N. Test.  Beza, 
† Philolog. Sac.  Glassius, 
‖ Animadv. in Lib. N. Test.  Knatchbull and 
(a) Synops. Crit. in plurimis Locis.  Pool. And I observe, that not only Words and Sentences are oft Transposed, but also Psalms, Chapters, and whole Books of Holy Scripture.  
For Psalms, the 52d. should be before the 3d. for we read of Doeg the Edomite, 1 Sam. 21. and 22. who is mentioned in the Title of the 52d. to have told Saul, that David was come to the House of Ahimelech; which was long before Absolom's Rebellion, 2 Sam. 15. upon Occasion whereof the 3d. Psalm was penned, as appears by the Inscription; A Psalm of David, when he fled from Absolom his Son. And the 90th. Psalms, if Moses was the Author, challengeth Precedency in Point of Time to all the Other; for he was above 400 Years before David, Asaph, and other Holy Penmen of the Psalms.  
For Chapters, there is a strange 
* Alstedij Thesaur. Chronol.  Transposition of them in Jeremiah; The 26th, and 27th. are in Order of Time before the 25th. The 35th, and 36th. before the 32d, 33d, 34th. The 45th, and 46th. before the 37th, 38th, 39th, 40th, 42d, 43d, 44th. So the 29th. of Ezekiel is prior to the 26th, 27th, 28th. And the 31st. to the End of the Book is before the 30.  
Lastly, For Books, Hosea is before 
† Alsted. ubi supra.  Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel and Daniel; so is Jonah before Hosea, Joel, Amos and Obadiah, tho' placed after them. So 
* Ibid.  Luke wrote before Mark, and John wrote the Gospel 6 Years after the Revelation. And 
(a) Annot. on the Title of the Epist. to the Romans.  Hammond tells us, 'tis commonly acknowledged, that the 1st. and 2d. to the Thess. were written before the 1st. and 2d. to the Corinthians. And Alstedius says, that Peter wrote his First Epistle, and Judas his, before Paul wrote to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, the Second to Timothy, Philemon and the Hebrews.  
Now as this Transposition is no Argument against their Divine Authority, or the least Diminution of the Truths in them contained; so it shows the Probability of a Trajection in Mat. 26.30. and the more especially, if we consider these two Things;  
1. That Writers in general tell us, from Paulus Burgensis (of whom before, p. 78.) that the Jews used a Passover-Hymn.  
2. That Luke, who mentions this Passage, I will not drink of the Fruit of the Vine, etc. places it immediately after the Paschal-Cup, Chap. 22.18. which Matthew and Mark put just after the Lord's-Supper. So that if we would reconcile the Evangelists, and do believe there was a Passover Hymn in Use among the Jews, and that Christ kept the Passover according to their Custom and Usage, we must admit of a Trajection in Mat. 26.29. and Mark 14.25. and consequently in Mat. 26.30. and Mark 14.26.  
And 'tis no more groundless, all these things well considered, for the Ohjecters to appropriate this Hymn to the Passover, tho' 'tis not placed immediately after it by Matthew and Mark; than to say, such a Word, Verse, Psalm, Chapter, or Book of Holy Scripture, doth Peculiarly belong to such a Person, Thing, Fact or Time; because the Natural Order is Trajected or Transposed. We have two remarkable ●nstances further to clear this; in Psal. 78, 46, ●7, 48. the Plague of Hail and Thunder is set ●fter that of the Caterpillar and Locust; when in Exodus 9 and 10 Chapters, 'tis set before it: And ●n Amos 2.9, 10. the Bringing of the Children of israel up from the Land of Egypt, is placed after ●he Destruction of the Amorite, when it was long ●efore; compare Exod. 12.35, 51. with Numb. ●1. 24. 'Tis Hierom's Observation, upon Amos 2. ●hat In reciting the Praises of God, the Order of Hi●●ory is not kept, but it often falls out, that things first ●●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 o● the Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures to Learned Men only, and so to an Enslaving of us to thei● Dictates and Authority? I Reply, Humane Learning is singularly useful in Translations, and in giving the Grammatical, Historical, Topographical an● Chronological Explications of the Holy Scriptures; bu● 'tis Divine Learning alone that instructs to the Kingdom of God, and makes a Man wise to Salvation For 'tis the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation tha● leads into the Saving Knowledge of Christ, and th● Spiritual Understanding of the Mysteries of th● Gospel. And therefore if a Man or Woman be ignorant of Humane Learning, mere Strangers t● Arts and Languages; yet if they have Divine Learning, are taught and instructed by the Holy Spiri● and yield Obedience thereunto, they come to kno● the Mind of the Lord in the Holy Scriptures, an● to be sensible Witnesses of the same; while other with all their Humane Literature, and Skill i● Originals, not regarding the Inward Revelation of the Spirit of God upon their Minds, but depending upon, and trusting to their Natural an● Acquired Abilities, which cannot possibly unfold 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 ●etter, which is but as the Cabinet to the Jewel; at the other, coming to the Spirit and Life, are ●ruly made Possessors of the Jewel itself. The Holy scriptures with respect to all saving Spiritual Understanding thereof, are as a Sealed Book, till the Lion ●f the Tribe of Judah breaks off the Seals, and o●ens the Sacred and Spiritual Contents to the Soul. And hence it is, that so many Learned Doctors ●nd Rabbis have Ears, and hear not; Eyes, and ●e not; and Understandings, and perceive not; because they consult with Flesh and Blood, with ●heir own Carnal Wisdom and Reasonings, and ●eject the Counsel of God, which he gives in by ●he Spirit of his Son, to direct and guide us ●to all Truth. But they that wait upon the ●ord in the true Poverty and Humility of their ●wn Spirits, and do purely resolve their Faith ●to the Glorious Power of God, without any Mixture of the Wisdom of Man, these have the ●yes of their Minds opened by the Great and ●ble Illuminator, Christ Jesus, to see the Works ●f the Lord, and his Wonders in the Depths of ●oly Scripture, while the mere Letter-Wise cannot, ●ith all their Worldly Wisdom, discern them; ●or the Things of God (saith the Apostle) knoweth no ●an, but the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 2.11. No Man can ●er come Spiritually to know the things of God, ●at is, the Mysteries of the Gospel, but by the Imitate Revelation of the Spirit of God. He hath re●●aled them to us by his Spirit, v. 10. Now as they were ●●rst revealed unto the Apostles by the Spirit, so ●●st they again be revealed unto us, (tho' we have ●●em in their Words already,) by the same Spirit, or ●●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 sam● Mutable Nature with it: Singing to the Praise o● God being, as, I conceive, hath been sufficiently proved, a Moral Duty; and therefore of Universal and Perpetual Obligation, and so fit t● be used upon that, or any other Joyful Occasion. Essay, p. 22.  
Reply 3. He hath not sufficiently proved Singin● to the Praise of God to be a Moral Duty, as I hav● shown in my first Chapter; where his Notion o● the Moral Duties of Religion, as being Originally Written in the Heart of Man by Nature, an● still in a great Measure to be discerned by ser●ous Attention and Consideration, without an● Special Revelation, and his Five Considerations t● prove the Morality of Singing, according to th● aforesaid Notion, are Examined and Disproved and therefore the Singing he contends for, is n● of Universal and Perpetual Obligation.  
R. A. 4. There is the greatest Reason to conclude, that our Lord Sang this Hymn with h● Disciples, at least especially upon the Occasion of his own Supper, and the Commemoration ● his Sufferings, and redeeming Love therein; fo● as much as it was immediately joined thereto, ● the Evangelists plainly show. Essay, p. 23.  
Reply 4. This Answer is coincident with h● Second, in my Reply whereunto I have shew● the frequent use of Trajections in the Holy Scriptures, that Immediety of placing a Word or Sentence doth not always prove Immediety of Tim● Concord or Relation, and that there is a greate● Probability that this Hymn appertained to the Pass●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 mentioned it, when he 
* 1 Cor. 11.23, etc.  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 expressed 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 strengthened than weakened 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 expressed before he Broke Bread, and the Cup said to be taken after the same manner, his giving of Thanks before the Cup is necessarily to be understood; and so necessarily too, that without it we shall greatly wrong the Apostle's Words. For first he tells us, The Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread; and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, Take, Eat, this is my Body which is broken for you; this do in remembrance of me. And then adds immediately, After the same manner also the Cup. For the Words [He took] are a Supplement. So that this is the plain Meaning of the Apostle, That as the Lord Jesus took Bread and gave Thanks, so he also took the Cup and gave Thanks.  
Sect. 5. But (says R. A.) doth he any mo● expressly tell us, that when he had taken it, he ga● Thanks, than he tells us after they had drank it, Th● Sung an Hymn? Br. Vindication, p. 28.  
I Answer, Our Lord's Giving of Thanks is expressed before He broke the Bread, 1 Cor. 11. 2● and as much intimated before He gave the Cu● v. 25. as tho' it were actually expressed there; f● this Adverb [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hosautos',] after the sa● manner, cannot be restrained to the taking of t● Cup only, as tho' the Apostle intended no mo● by it, but that, and referred us to Matthew an● Mark for an Account of Christ's Giving of Than● after he had taken it; but also comprehend his Giving of Thanks. And therefore the Case, as R. ●. puts it, is not at all Parallel; for Giving of Than● before the Cup is manifestly included in the Synta● of the Apostle's Words; but there is not the lea● imaginable Intimation of Singing an Hymn.  
And as to the Supplement, [
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  Elab● He took,] which our Translators hav● used; and R. A. thinks is only th● Verb that must be here supplied, Appendix, ● 68, 69. I think not only Ela● is to be understood, but 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  K● eucharistesas also, being both expressed in v. 23, 24. And then the Sense wi● neither be incomplete, nor the Apostle mad● to speak contrary to the Evangelists, Mat. 26▪ 27. and Mark 14.23. but the Words will b● fully expressive of his Meaning, and exactly Harmonise with them; viz. After the same manner als● he took the Cup, and gave Thanks. And this is undoubtedly the Importance of the Adverb, [Hosautos] not only in this Place, but also i● Luke 22.20. And for the making of things ye● more plain, so that no Room may be left for a● Evasion; I observe in all other Places of the N. Testament, where we meet with this Word [Hosautos], i● necessarily imports the supplying of what went before, to make the Sense complete. Thus 'tis said of the Housholder, that He went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did [Hosautos] likewise, Mat. 20.5. that is, as he had done before, viz. He saw others standing idle in the Marketplace, and said unto them, Go ye also into the Vineyard, and whatsoever is right, I will give you, v. 3, 4. So we read in the Parable of A certain man, who had two Sons; that he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my Vineyard: And he came to the Second, and said [Hosautos] likewise, Mat. 21.28, 30. and what was it that he said likewise? why, he said, Son, go work to day in my Vineyard. See also Mat. 25.17. Mark 12.21. & 14.31. where the Word is also used, and necessarily requires the Supplement of something Antecedent to perfect the Sense. From what has been said, 'tis very Evident, that the Case of Singing an Hymn, and Christ's giving Thanks before the Cup, is not the same; for here is as much Proof as can be desired, that Christ Gave thanks before the Cup; but the Singing of an Hymn is totally omitted, both in Terms and Implication. And if after all this, R. A. shall yet insist upon it, as he doth in his Appendix, p. 69. That, here is no more express mention of Christ's Blessing the Cup, before his giving it to his Disciples, than there is of their Singing an Hymn after they had drank it. He will not, I hope, deny, the express mention of Blessing the Cup, 1 Cor. 10.16. The Cup of Blessing which we bless, whether we take those Words Literally or Allegorically. Wherefore the Objection stands still firm and unshaken, viz. That had this Hymn belonged to the Lord's-Supper, doubtless the Apostle would have mentioned it: Notwithstanding R. A's. Endeavours to the Contrary.  
And this will yet further appear, if we consider the Apology R. A. makes for the Apostle's real Omission of the Hymn, and pretended Leaving out of Christ's Giving thanks before the Cup; telling us, the Apostle's Design being, as he conceives, 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. For his Words manifestly imply, however intended by him, that it was the Apostle's Design to give an Account of all things pertaining to the Lord's Supper, tho' not so much as to correct those gross Abuses. So that under Pretence of excusing the Apostle's Omission, he hath, tho' unwittingly, both confirmed and reinforced the Objection. For the Words [not so much] respect more, the Degree or Manner, than the Substance or Matter of the Account given by the Apostle; who acquaints us with all things appertaining to the Supper, tho' not in so large a Manner as he delivers himself about those gross Abuses, which were crept into the Church at Corinth.  
Thus, to retort his own Words, Essay, p. 24. upon himself, with this necessary Variation; we have sufficient Reason to conclude, that our Lord neither Sang this Hymn with his Disciples, nor Sang it especially, much less only, upon the Occasion of his own Supper; and consequently, that we have here no certain Instance of his Singing Praise to his Father, as our Pattern.