AN ANSWER TO THE Rector of Bury's LETTER TO HIS FRIEND.  
Wherein is showed, That He has effectually, tho' unwillingly acquitted the Dissenters from his malicious Charge of their being Corrupters of the Word of God.  
That his attempts against the Titles of the Psalms, and Hebrew Bibles are Feeble and Inconsistent.  
By JAMES OWEN.  
Malunt nescire, quia jam oderunt.  Tert. Apol Cap. 1. 
Hi rumores turpissimos serunt, & quod ab ipsis egressum est, id ab aliis audisse se simulant, iidem auctores & exaggeratores.  Hieron ad Furiam. 
LONDON: Printed by S. Bridge, for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers-Chapel, 1699.   

AN ANSWER TO THE Rector of Bury's LETTER.  
JVlius Caesar reports of the Ancient Gallic Soldiers 
* De Bell. Gall. , that at the first onset they were more than Men, and at the second less than Women. Such a Champion is the Rector of Bury, who has charged the Dissenters with a Passion exceeding that of a Man, even such as distinguishes the Accuser of the Brethren, but finding himself warmly received, he consults his own Safety by an inglorious flight, and would shelter himself in such Refuges, as would be generously disdained even by those of the weaker Sex, whose Conduct is influenced by any Principles of Virtue and Honour: He is so vain as to compare himself to Scipio Africanus 
† Rem. on Rem. p. 7. , whose Policy (says he) I thought fit to make use of by carrying the War into the Enemies own Country, and to lay to the Dissenter's Charge a Crime, &c Our renowned English Scipio is so fond of his Military Politics that he cannot forbear mentioning them again in his Letter. I thought not improper 
‖ Letter, p. 19 , says he, to carry the War into the Enemies own Country, and tax them with corrupting, Acts 6.3.  
Here is a formidable War begun upon us, the Rector declares us all Enemies, because the Note-maker and Mr. Calvin, as he pretends, had broken the Peace, and treats us with all the fierceness and malignity, which he reckons due to Enemies, especially in a time of Public Hostility.  
One or two Persons had displeased him, and instead of engaging them, like another Goliath he assaults the whole Body of English Dissenters, together with the Church of Scotland. He lays to their charge things they knew not, and makes them Corrupters of the Word of God. He pretends they Printed Ye for We in Acts 6.3. And this he attempts to prove by Four Arguments.  
1. The first Corruption happened in Cambridge in the Year 1638. 2. It favours the Dissenters. 3. The Episcopal Party designed not to corrupt this Place. 4. A Cameronian urged this corrupt Reading. These are the Forces, with which he manages the War, as he calls it. I fully confuted his Arguments in my Remarks on his Corruption-Sermon. Sometime after he Publishes his Remarks on Remarks, wherein he pretends to confirm his Charge, and to recruit his Forces by the Addition of a Story or two, which he tacks to the Cameronian-Story. That Book is full of bitter and indecent Reflections on the whole Tribe of Dissenters. In my further Vindication of the Dissenters, I answered all his Four Arguments, exposed the weakness and invalidity of 'em, which must of necessity affect the Author, and now and then I complained of his Injustice, want of Candour, Charity and Truth. The Rector, as I have Reason to believe, being Convicted of the wrong he had done us, and not being able to vindicate his Arguments any longer, Publishes a sort of Letter to a feigned Friend (for real ones he has none in this Controversy) wherein he offers not the least Thing in Defence of his Three first Arguments, nor indeed could he with any colour of Reason, so that Three Squadrons of Mr. Scipio's Army are entirely cut off, nor had he the Courage so much as to attempt to recruit them: Nay, he tamely gives 'em up for Dead; and confesses, 
* Letter, Page 19  that the Life of the whole Arguments put together, depends on the Evidence of those Matters of Fact. If his Cameronian Story, and the two other want Evidence, or do not affect the Dissenters; then by his own Confession, his Three other Arguments want Life. When he brought these doughty Squadrons first into the Field, he took it for granted they had Life and Strength in 'em, but now they are Dead and unserviceable to him, who can help it? He should have taken some Care to cover the Carcases of his slain Regiments, and not suffer their offensive Remains to infect the Air. But when a Valiant General is reduced to those extremities, as to be able only to take Care of his own Person; he is to be pitied, if not excused, for neglecting an Act of Piety, to which his Heroic Nature would have generously disposed him. But he is not without some hopes, but the Cameronian-Story may inspire Life into 'em, and give 'em a Resurrection; and therefore he labours all he can to support the Credit of it. The Story in short is this. One Colonel Fairfax reported in a Public House at Rochdale to the Reverend Mr. Piggot and Mr. Milne, that a Scotch Cameronian had Cited this corrupt Place in a Public Sermon.  
To this I answered, 1. It is uncertain, whether Colonel Fairfax reported it, for Mr. Milne avers he never was in the colonel's Company; so that the Report depends on Mr. Piggot's single Testimony: And some say, this is not the first Brat, he has imposed on the World. 2. If the Colonel reported it, it is but a single Evidence, nor does he say he heard the Cameronian himself urge this corrupt Reading, so that what he Deposes, is by hear-say, nor does he Name the Person, Place, or Time. Such a blind Evidence would look ridiculous in a Court of Justice. 3. I Published an Extract of the Vote of the General Assembly of Scotland, wherein they disown this Corruption, and declare they never heard of any in that Kingdom, that applied that Text to prove the People's Power in Ordaining their Ministers. This may ground a just Suspicion, that the Story was invented in Rochdale, at a Public House, for it is not so much as known in Scotland, nor mentioned by such of the Episcopal Dissenters as have Published abundance of extravagant Stories to reproach the Government there.  
These things are enough to invalidate his Cameronian Story with all unprepossessed Persons, but the Rector, whose Talon lies in collecting and improving Stories, would have the World believe Matter of Fact is very true, because  
1. 'Tis plain, the Colonel believed it, nor would he entertain a Story without good ground, Page 20.  
Soldiers and Travellers are not the most exact in examining the grounds of every Story they hear, and perhaps report again over their Liquors to divert the Company. 'Tis plain, that Persons of a more sacred Character can entertain groundless Stories, and entertain their Hearers with them, for want of better Matter to fill up their Hour, though perhaps the Rector is the only Man that borrows materials for his Sermons out of the Can-Office.  
If the Colonel had good ground for his Relation, why had he not named the Person, Time and Place? There is good Reason, I confess, why these Circumstances should be omitted by the Colonel and the Rector, that we might be put beyond all possibility of detecting the falsity of the Report.  
I observed that such a blind Evidence, where Persons, Time and Place are not named, would look ridiculous in a Court of Justice, but the Rector good Man, does not pretend to observe the troublesome Forms of Justice in the management of his Charge.  
He Answers.  
2. Such Testimonies are not sufficient to ground a judiciary definitive Sentence upon, yet they are oftentimes believed by the Court.  
By his own Confession the Rector is an unjust Judge, for he has positively condemned us without Evidence. The Design of his Sermon, and Vindication of it, is to prove us Corrupters of the Word of God and the Evidence is blind, and would not pass in any Court of Justice, but that of the Rector's, as himself is forced to acknowledge. He may Believe and Judge as he pleases, but while he produces no other Evidence to Condemn us by, but what would acquit us in all Courts of Justice; we will take leave to appeal from his unrighteous Sentence, to the sober and rational Sentiments of Mankind.  
He would do well to tell us what sort of Faith that is, which Courts of Justice give to a blind Evidence, which he saith, they often Believe. The Papists have brought an implicit Faith into the Church, but the Rector is the first Man that brings an implicit Faith into Courts of Justice. He makes them to believe an Accusation against John a Nokes and John a Style, that Mr. Somebody has committed a very great Crime, as suppose corrupting the Word of God; but the Deponent knows neither the Man, nor his Name, nor his Country, nor the Time when, nor the Place where the Offence was committed; nor can he say any thing of the Matter, but by hear-say. Will any Body in his sound Mind believe this Evidence?  
Surely our Learned Judges are not such Credulous Coxcombs as the Rector makes 'em to be, nor can I think him such a one himself, though for some Reasons he thinks fit to abuse the World; I presume he has more Sense than to believe his own Evidence, but it's no strange thing for Persons, abandoned to unreasonable and injurious Passions to abuse the very Courts of Justice, that would reduce them to the inoffensive Government of Reason.  
But an Evidence (as he proceeds) may be sufficient for private Conviction, which will not be allowed of in Public Forms of Justice, Ibid.  
It's hard to understand what he means by Private Conviction. Does he mean by it, that it's lawful to defame a Man upon any blind Evidence provided it be done behind his Back and in Private? This is to wound a Man's Reputation in Secret, and inconsistent with the Character of a Citizen of Zion, Psalm 15.  
Or does he mean upon such an Evidence, we may entertain a Private Belief of a Man's being guilty, but can't Publish his Gild, because the Evidence is not according to the Public Forms of Justice. Why then had not the Rector contented himself with his Private Faith concerning us, and not Published our pretended Conviction to the World? A Public Conviction ought to be according to the Public Forms of Justice by his own Confession, and therefore he is self-condemned for receding from the allowed Rules of Justice.  
The Rector has but one other Refuge left, and if that fails him, his Cameronian Story fastens upon him an indelible Reproach. Paul saith he, accuses some of the Corinthians, and he had it from some of the House of Cloe, whom he mentions not, for disparaging him. His Letters are weighty and powerful, but his bodily Presence is weak and contemptible, 2 Cor. 10.10. Here was neither Person, nor Time, nor Place named, and yet Paul believed the Report, page 20.  
To which I Answer.  
1. How does the Rector know the Apostle had this Information from some of the House of Chloe? He doth not say so, 2 Cor. 10.10. But the Rector has a singular Faculty in discovering Secret Matters or rather in making bold Conjectures. He finds that those of Chloe had informed St. Paul, that there were Contentions at Corinth, when the first Epistle was Written, 1 Cor. 1.11. And therefore he concludes, they must be his Informers when he wrote his Second Epistle, which was at least some Months after.  
2. It was not necessary to Name Persons, where no question was made of the Matter of Fact, and yet it does not follow, but the Apostle knew well enough, who the Persons were. He had good Evidence of the Truth of the Report, otherwise he had not mentioned it with so much Assurance. And perhaps, he suppressed their Names, because he would not expose 'em to Public Reproach, but by an indefinite Reproof reduce 'em to Repentance, 1 Cor. 4.6.  
3. When I saw the Name of St. Paul, I began to hope the Rector was coming to himself, and willing to imitate that great Pattern of Sincerity and Charity, which he so much recommends in one of his Epistles, to which the Rector refers us; 1 Cor. 13. but I soon perceived my Error, and found that the Rector had read those Epistles, not with design to Practise that Charity which thinks no Evil, 1 Cor. 13.5. But to draw in St. Paul to his Party to Patronise a false Accusation, tho' the Unhappiness of it is, St. Paul mentions a Matter of Fact that no Body disowned; that he could have proved on the guilty Persons, had they denied it; and it never entered into Paul's mind to charge the whole Church of Corinth with the supercilious Censures of the few false Apostles, that were there; but our Rector mentions a Fact that no Body knows any thing, of, that he cannot prove, tho' he has left no Stone unturned in attempting it, and in Imitation of Haman, not of St. Paul, he imputes the supposed fault of one Person, and that a Scotchman, to the whole Body of English-Dissenters.  
4. I cannot think St. Paul got his Information in an Alehouse, or from a Soldier of Fortune, or that he would have been so credulous as the Rector's Courts of Justice, who oftentimes believe a sort of blind Evidence, that affects neither Person, Time nor Place. The Apostle had more Wisdom and Honesty, than to receive such malicious Accusations. Suppose the Church of Corinth had remonstrated to St. Paul, that they knew of no Person that had disparaged him, and that they disapproved of such a Censure; can any Body imagine but his Candour would have acquitted them, except he could make good his Charge by positive Proof. Those of the Church of Scotland, have disclaimed the Error of the Press, which the Rector Charges upon them, and affirm they neither know, nor can learn, that ever any in their Nation did apply that Error to the People's Power in making Ministers. But the Rector, charitable Man, stands to his Accusation, and would feign have it pass for Truth, tho' he offers not any thing that looks like the shadow of a Proof.  
So much of the Cameronian Fable.  
As to his Story of Mr. Jolly's alleging this corrupt Reading, in Discourse with Mr. Ellison at Duckenfield-Hall: I told him, that He and Mr. Ellison are well-advised in their Reports; the one tells a Story of a nameless Cameronian in another Kingdom, the other Names his Person, but you must find him in another World, for he was Dead before this Report of him was Published; they are resolved to put us out of all hopes of being ever able to examine the Truth of their Tales.  
The Rector answers, There are those that can tell Mr. Owen, there was such a Minister as Mr. Jolly, there is such a Place as Duckenfield-Hall, etc.  
How does this prove the thing in Hand? Does it follow, because there was such a Man as Mr. Jolly at Duckenfield-Hall, and suppose engaged with Mr. Ellison in some Dispute about Church-Government. That he must be a. Corrupter of the Word of God? This is as concluding, as the Rector's Argument concerning Cambridge, 1638. He found there as he thought five or six Presbyterians among Two Thousand Scholars, therefore they were the Authors of the Corruption in Acts 3.6.  
Mr. Ellison's Testimony is a single one, and against a Dead Man, who cannot Answer for himself.  
True, saith the Rector, but no Judge, but upon such Testimonies would Decree the Nuncupative Will of a Deceased Person good and valid, p. 21.  
No Judge would Decree a Nuncupative Will good upon a single Testimony. Our Law requires the Oaths of three Witnesses, if the Estate bequeathed be considerable; nor doth it admit any Testimony of a Nuncupative Will after six Month, unless it were committed to Writing within six Days after making the said Will, Stat. 19 Car. II. Cap. 3. So careful is the Law to prevent Frauds and Forgeries, respecting the Dead. I inquire not, whether there are not more than six Months between the reporting of this Story, and the Time of the pretended Dispute, and whether it was Written within six Days after. Be that Matter as it will, Mr. Ellison's single Evidence against the Dead is not legal, as the Rector ignorantly insinuates  
I am told, that Mr. Jolly was looked upon as Presbyterian in his Judgement, and it is not likely he would urge a corrupt Text to vindicate an Opinion, that was inconsistent with his Principles.  
So much of the Duckenfield-Hall Story.  
I shall speak a Word or two to the Bolton-Story, which is this. A Gentleman, now living in Bolton heard some Dissenters cite Acts 6. as the Cameronian did, and they appealed to the Scotch Bible.  
To this I answered, that I suspected the Truth of this Story, because few of the Scotch-Bibles are misprinted, as I made it appear by a Catalogue of the Editions, the two that were misprinted there were under the Bishops.  
The Rector wisely overlooks this, as he does most of my Book, but according to his usual Modesty; he saith, The Story is an unexceptionable Proof of what it was produced for, p. 21.  
That part of it that concerns the Scotch-Bibles, I have detected to be false. When a Man is found to falter in one part of a Story, the Credit of the whole is justly suspected.  
The Bolton Gentleman is also a single Witness, and Names no Persons, nor appears above Board himself Truth needs not sneak into Corners, it dares show its Face, and fears no Opposition. There is something of Mystery in it, that this Witness conceals his own Name, and those of the accused Dissenters. I am apt to think they may be alive as well as the Gentleman. I suppose, if they had been Dead, we should have had their Names enroled with Mr. Jolly's. But suppose these Stories had been true, they cannot affect the whole Body of Dissenters.  
I have now answered all that the Rector has to say in Confirmation of his Charge, and appeal to the World, whether this Man has done us common Justice. All his Four Arguments are dwindled into one, which contains Matter of Fact. He confesses himself, that the Life of the whole Argument put together, depends on the Evidence of those Matters, of Fact which makes his Fourth Argument.  
Now since his Matters of Fact want legal Evidence, his Three former Arguments, which he has deserted, are destitute of Life by his own Confession.  
Thus all the Forces of this mighty Warrior are routed 
* Isaiah. 28.15. , and tho' he has made Lies his last Refuge, this also not only fails him, but exposes him to the vindictive Strokes of victorious Truth, whose Triumphant Chariot he follows with such a dispirited Aspect, as if he would move the Compassions of the Spectators, and implore the kind Intercessions of his Reader, that his expiring Reputation be not made a Victim to the just Resentments of injured Innocence. One while he is content to surrender the Interests of his Reputation to the Dissenters, p. 26. He hopes they'll be so kind to him, as not to condemn him for Fool, or Knave, or Impudent, or Blasphemer, Ibid. Our Scipio Anglicanus cries Quarter, and hopes for Mercy at their Hands, tho' he has injured them to the utmost of his Power. He knows the Men, that they are like the Kings of Israel, of a merciful Disposition, but then he ought to make his address with a Rope about his Neck, as the Syrian General did before him; humbly acknowledging his Crime, and I dare Promise for 'em, they'll pass a very favourable Sentence upon him. Another while he pretends, he could have answered every Paragraph in my Vindication, but to what Purpose? When shall we have an end? p. 26. Who dare Question the Rector's Abilities to Answer my Book, since he gives no Proof of 'em? But to what Purpose should a Man, who is sufficiently bastinadoed procure to himself more blows? It is a wiser part to end the Matter, let him cease his unjust Criminations, and we shall soon make an end; and until he does so, let him expect the Chastisement that is due unto bold and obstinate Calumniators. He complains I give him hard Words, to which I answer in the Words of Vespasian the Emperor, Qui Prior lacessivit seipsum Praerogatiuâ dignitatis privavit. The Rector by publishing so base and groundless a Calumny, and attempting to justify it against the most convictive Reason, has forfeited the Benefit of those Civilities that are owing to a fair Adversary. He brags he has made War upon us, and then complains of hard blows.  
His Sermon, and the Defence of it, abound with the rudest Invectives. But he pretends, that he has engaged himself by Promise not to Answer a Fool according to his Folly, Prov. 26.4. Which he says, he'll religiously observe, Lett. p. 1. He promises not to give ill Language, (Ibid.) and in the same Breath calls, me Fool. It seems, to call a Man Fool is no ill Language with the Rector, whatever it was in Christ's account 
* Mat. 5.22. . How religiously he observes his Promise, the Reader may observe in several Instances. In p. 19 he compares us to Malefactors that have Brow enough to assert their Innocence, when the Halter is about their Necks. In p. 23. he saith, they seem to by of the Humour of that lewd Soldier, who excused himself thus, that the Commandment is, thou shalt not, but not I shall not. In p. 26. he suggests by way of Query, Whether Mr. O. has not done what in him lies to deserve the Character of a great Rogue, for affirming that the Rector had given him that Character in his R. R. p. 58. to which Mr. O. still appeals. It is true, he does it by a sly Insinuation, and because I take notice of his calling me so, he pretends that I misrepresent him, and deserve that Character for so doing. I only mention these things as instances of his Religious Performance of his Promise, not to give ill Language. Naturam expellas furca licet. Can the Ethiopian change his Skin?  
He falls foul on the Note-maker, p. 22. in whom I am not concerned: It would have looked more honourable in the Rector to have answered his Arguments, than to set up for Informer General, to accuse the whole Body of Dissenters of a Crime he can never prove upon 'em.  
In p. 23. he reflects on Mr. Baxter, but not a word of his corrupting the Scripture, by leaving out these in Acts 15.28. Since I showed him the like Omission in the Homilies of the Church.  
He wisely overlooks this Crime, which he had aggravated in the Epistle before his Sermon, and in his Remark upon Remark But now he silently dismisses Mr. B. whom he cannot Condemn without involving himself and the Church of England in the same Sentence.  
Now suppose a Man of Mr. Gips' his Temper, should take up his Arguments against Mr. B. and retort it upon the Church of England; by affirming, that the Church hath cunningly left out the Word (these) merely to support her Proposition, and hath not had the Ingenuity to confess her Error, nor yet the Courage to Palliate it with any excuse 
† Epistle before his Sermon.  no, nor has her Champion, the Courage to do it for her, tho' he has been told of it 
‖ Ibid. . And he is the more concerned to do it, because he has subscribed her Homilies, which the Dissenters have not done, and so made himself accessary to the Corruption.  
Though the Rector has disingennously deserted the Church, and left her unvindicated under the odious Imputation of corrupting the Word of God, I will be so just to her, as to acquit her from so black a Charge. It was not the Design of the Compilers of the Homilies, nor of Mr. B. to quote the very Words of Scripture, nor was the Omission of the word these designed for any ill ends by either of 'em.  
I shall now return to the former Part of his Letter, and can't but take notice what an Artist the Rector is in methodizing his Epistle. The principal Controversy between him and me; was, Whether the Dissenters were corrupters of the Word of God? The other about the Titles of the Psalms, and the Corruption of the Hebrew Copies came in accidentally, and therefore I threw it into a Postscript by itself, that it might not interfere with the main Point in debate.  
The Rector being sensible that he is quite baffled in the principal Controversy between us, and having nothing material to offer more upon that Subject, gins his Letter with Animadversions on my Postscript, and comes not to the main point, viz. His charge exhibited against the Dissenters of corrupting the Word of God, until P. 19 and then speaks next to nothing of it. All he has to say to the principal Subject in debate, takes up but Three Pages of his Letter, which consists of Twenty-seven in all. Had he been able to say more to it, to be sure he would have done it, for he still shows his  to the Cause; and would have the World believe the main charge is beyond all Controversy, P. 19 Since he can defend it no longer, he would persuade us to be so good Natured, as to let it pass without any further Controversy; and if we don't, we are like those Malefactors that assert their Innocence, when the Halter is about their Necks, etc. P. 19 If our Accuser had the Honour to be our Executioner, I see we must expect little Mercy at his Hands, We must all undergo the Fate of Saul's Seven Children, who were hung up before the Lord for their Fathers Sin. And it would be no Relief to us to assert our Innocency, for we must bear the Error of the Scotch-Cameronian. And if we say, this is hard measure, to Impute the fault of one Man to all Dissenters, the Rector Answers, that this must needs be just, because Saul's offence was Revenged upon Seven of his Children. R. R. P. 48. The Rector is a Man that loves to harp upon the same String in all his Composures, and were we to stand at his Bar, I much doubt, whether he would allow us the Benefit of the Clergy; and if such a favour were granted us: I fear we should scarce read our Neck-verse, without being condemned for Corrupting the Word of God.  
But to return, from this Hanging Digression, to his Animadversions, on my Postscript, wherein I asserted, the Divine Authority of the Titles of the Psalms and the purity of the Hebrew Text.  
As to the First of these, the Rector does not pretend to Answer my Arguments for the Divine Authority of the Titles, or to Vindicate his own against it; and the Reason of this omission is obvious: For where he thinks he has any thing, that he can take Advantage of he lays hold on it. He says, P. 2. That I give him Words of Brass, by pronouncing him a Blasphemer, for saying that many of the Titles were to no Purpose at all. I did not expressly call him so, but what I said I say again. That it would have looked more modest in him, to have said, we understand not the use of many Titles; than boldly, if not Blasphemously, to Charge the Spirit of God with Impertinencies, Vind. P. 44. And in another Place to say, that Psalm, 72 20. Is manifestly false if the Title be true, R. R. P. 13. Many would call this Blasphemy, but I do not. It is a very poor Shift, by which he would mollify his Words, the Titles are to no Purpose at all; that is, they are not useful to unfold Mysteries, Let. P. 2. To no Purpose, and to such a Purpose are very different things; such as do not unfold Mysteries may be useful to other Ends.  
But they are more mysterious, says he, than the Psalms themselves; and the Spirit of God would not explain, Obscurum per Obscurius. All are not so, and those that are obscure to us, might be otherwise to the old Hebrews.  
Greg. Nyssen observed (as the Rector adds) that there was not an entire Agreement between, the Christians and the Jews about the Titles, which Mr. O. has declined to Answer to, P. 3. You see, tho' the Rector cannot Answer my Arguments, nor defend his own, he studies every little Advantage. I told him, I had not Greg, by me, tho' I see nothing in him as he represents him, that makes against my Argument. There is not an entire Agreement, between the Greek Bible which was in the Hands of the Christians, and the Hebrew Bible to this day, in many more things than the Titles of the Psalms, and yet we receive the Hebrew Bible as Divinely inspired; and so we do the Titles of the Psalms.  
But, if the Rector cannot defend his old Arguments, he hath found out a new one, which is this: The Titles of the several Books of Scripture, are not Canonical; and the Titles of the Psalms must run the same fate, P. 3, 4, 5. And why so good Sir?  
1. The Titles of the Books of Scripture, are acknowledged to be human Additions; I never met with any Author, Jewish or Christian, that affirms them to be Canonical; but the Titles of the Psalms, are reputed Canonical, by the Christian and Jewish Doctors; and commented upon by them as such, whereas they rarely take notice of the Titles of the Books of Scripture, except it be now and then, to tell us that they bear such Titles.  
2. The Titles of the Books of the old Testament, in our Hebrew Bibles are put by themselves, as distinct from the rest of the Books; and are made the running Titles in the top of the Leaves. But, the Titles of the Psalms are made part of the Psalms themselves, in all our Hebrew Bibles, in which the Title, if there be any to the Psalm, is always the first Verse.  
3. All the Books of the Bible have Titles, but so have not all the Psalms; If they had been human Additions, it had been as easy to have given a Title to each Psalm, as to each Book of the Bible, but the ancient Jews, who durst not add to the Word of God, would not prefix Titles to those Psalms, which originally had none.  
The Books of the Prophets, as he goes on, are thus entitled, the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, etc. I cannot think the Inspired Prophets set these Titles on the head of their Books.  
Here the Rector thinks aright, for the Title he mentions is to be found only in the English Translation; the Hebrew and Greek Bibles which he had not diligence enough to consult, have no more than Isaiah.  
He nibbles at a concession of Mine, that it was a prevailing Opinion, that all the Psalms were penned by David, what then, demands he, will become of the Title of the 90. Psalms? P. 5.  
I obviated this Query in the very next Line, out of Theodoret, who says, David wrote it, but adapted it to Moses. I told the Rector that I presumed the Titles were left out of the Liturgy Psalms, because they were designed to be Sung. Vind. P. 53. 'Tis my very Plea in Defence of the Church of England 
* Letter, Page 6. , saith he: But you must thank me for it, Mr. Rector, for you thought of no such Plea in your Sermon, but call on the Dissenters, to prefix the Titles to the Singing Psalms, if they be part of Scripture. I objected, that in the Parish Churches, the Psalms that want Titles are read. True, saith the Rector, 'tis the fault of some, the crime of others, the unhappiness of others, who cannot prevail, with their People to bear a part in the rehaersing of them; for the order of the Church is, that they be said or sung, said, that is at least repeated alternatim, by Minister and People, which is a Species of singing. P. 6.  
If the order be say or sing, First, how can it be a Fault, a Crime, to say the Psalms and not to sing them, the Rubric allows both, and therefore both are lawful. No wonder the Rector charges us with Crimes he cannot prove, since he doth so by his own Brethren, he makes 'em Criminals for doing what the Rubric bids 'em do.  
Secondly, I thought saying and singing, being mentioned disjunctively, were different things, but with the Rector, saying is a Species of singing. Does not this Man Ridicule the Rubric of the Church, by making it speak Nonsense? say or sing, that is, according to the Rector's Exposition, sing or say. This looks like defaming the Common-Prayer, for which I remit him to the Censure of his Ordinary.  
Thirdly, I never yet could see any Rubric or Canon for reading the Psalms alternatim, Authors make mention of alternate singing, which was used with great variety in ancient Times.  

* Epist. 36.  Basil saith, the Congregation was divided into two Parts, and sung alternately one to another.  

† Chr. 1 Cor. 14. Hom. 36. ad finem.  Chrysostom seems to allow the People no part in singing, but the echoing out, of the last Word of the Verse, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—, He that singeth, singeth alone, and all the rest Echo forth the last Words. And it may be, this is the meaning of the Council of Laodicea, Can. 15. Wherein they forbidden all singing in the Church, except by the Regular Singers.  
Gregory the Great, forbids any to sing in the Church but the Inferior Orders, as the Subdeacons, etc. Lib. 4. c. 88 Perhaps he had an Eye to this Canon. Dionysius, who goes under the Name of the Areopagite, says, that the Bishop with the whole Ecclesiastical Order sing the Sacred Hymns, Eccles. Hierarch. c. 3. It seems the People were wholly excluded from the Public Praises. The way of singing alternately is very ancient, some derive it from Moses and Miriam, Exod. 15.21. And Miriam answered them, etc. But it is uncertain how Miriam and the Women of Israel sung, whether they sung in their Dances, the very same Words that Moses and the Men of Israel sung, or whether they sung the first Verse of Moses' Song by way of Intercalation, as the Burden of that Song; and it may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answered, signifies no more than she said, in which Sense the Word Answer is used in the New Testament, Matth. 11.25. But it's evident here, that it was different from the Manner of reading the Psalms with us, for Miriam and the Women sung the first Verse of Moses Song, and with us the Minister reads the first Verse of the Psalm, which the People neither Read nor Sing.  
It should seem by Josephus, that the Levites only sung in the Temple at Jerusalem 
* Antiq. Judaic. XX. 8. . The Essenes', as Philo affirms, had one chief Singer, who sung alone until he came to the last Words, than all the People joined with him 
‖ Euseb. Hist. II. 16. Edit. Christ. & Philo de vitâ Contempl. .  
This way of Singing by Parts was used by the ancient Heathens, as appears by that in Homer 
† Iliad. à versùs fin. , who represents the Muses singing alternately.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
The first Man that appointed Antiphons' or Responsory Singing in Constantinople was Chrysostom, in Emulation of the Arians, as Socrates affirms. Eccl. Hist. VI 8.  
Nicephorus ascribes the Invention of Antiphons' to Ignatius, who in a Vision heard the Angels praising the Trinity in Responsory Hymns, which he thereupon introduced into the Church of Antioch. Eccl. Hist. XIII. 8.  
But be this matter as it will, there is no Precedent that ever I could meet with for Reading the Psalms alternately, nor could I ever find either Canon or Rubric for it in the Church of England. And if there be neither, it looks like a piece of Will-Worship, that can neither be warranted by the Laws of God nor Man. It seems neither decent nor orderly, nor agreeable to the Apostle's Rule, that a Woman should not speak in the Church: And in our Parish-Churches, they speak as loud as the Men. If Reading be Teaching or Preaching, as some Doctors of the Church have affirmed, particularly the present Bishop of Derry, our Reading Women usurp the Office of Teachers in the Church, and thereby strengthen the Hands of the Quaker's Women-Preachers. This way of Reading the Psalms, fills the Congregation with a confused noise, that the Ignorant that cannot Read, understand not one Word that is said. Cyprian Condemns tumultuous Lopuacity in our Devotions.  
Non passim ventilare preces nostras inconditis vocibus, nec Petitionem, commendandum modestè Deo, tumultuosâ Loquacitate jactare, De Orat. Dom.  
I affirmed, That the not Reading of the Titles (in the Parochial Assemblies which I had mentioned a little before) was an Innocent Omission, but the Rectors attempt to thrust 'em out of the Holy Canon was Vile and Impious.  
The Rector applies this Omission to the Dissenters, and cries Him! An on Innocent Omission? no, saith he, 'tis a Sacrilegious Omission, Lett. P. 7. This blind Combatant, by attempting to wound his Enemies as he calls them, Stabs his own Friends, and makes them guilty of a Sacrilegious Omission: The Dissenters do read the Titles of the reading Psalms.  
The Rector proceeds in the next Place to consider the Hebrew Copies, which he says are much corrupted, and because St. Jerom asserts the Purity of 'em; he persecuttes him with the same malignity as he does the Dissenters. I rebuked him in my Vind. for his indecent Usage, of so Holy and Learned a Father, and so eminent a Champion for the Christian Cause, against all sorts of Opposers, I refer the Reader to his Character, and my Defence of him against the Rector's Calumnies, Postscript C. 3. He severely Censures Mr. Baxter, both in his R. R. P. 61. and in his Lett. P. 23. For exposing the Infirmities of the Fathers, to whose Zeal and Learning, we own our Religion under God; and yet flings all the dirt on St. Jerom, one of the most eminent of 'em, which Malice and Rage and intemperate Zeal, (they are his own Words of Mr. Baxter) could furnish him with. He treats him more basely than ever Ruffinus, his professed Adversary has done. His Great Name in the Christian World is too venerable to suffer any Diminution by the Rector's self-condemning reflections, and needs not any Apology of mine. Therefore I will consider what he has to offer against the Purity of the Hebrew Bibles, which he would have us believe are corrupted in material Things.  
The Truths of Revelation, says he, are to be sought for not out of the Hebrew Texts only, nor out of the Lxx. only, but out of both together, with all other ancient Translations, and the numerous quotations of Scripture in the Fathers. P. 11. The meaning of this Harangue, is, that there might be patched up a complete Bible or a perfect System of revealed Truths out of the Hebrew, Lxx. other Translations and Quotations of the Fathers; but none of these alone contain all Truths of Revelation. The Papists send us to the ancient Fathers for the Sense of Scriptures, but the Rector remits us to them for the Scriptures themselves. He would do well to favour the World with a Complete Collection of the Truths of Revelation, out of all these Stores, which are inaccessible to the Unlearned, and he is the more obliged to do it because he has condemned our Corrupt Bibles to be burnt.  
I offered four Arguments for the Purity of the Hebrew Copies, which I vindicated and confirmed.  
The Rector touches at the first, over looks the Second and Third, and splits the Foruth into Two.  
My first was, That the Hebrew Bible was incorrupt in our Saviour's Time, because he never charged the Jews with corrupting the Scriptures.  
No more, answers he, do the Apostles Charge them with corrupting the LXX. P. 11. I don't say the LXX. was corrupted at that Time, there were Authentic incorrupt Copies of it even in Origen's Time. They were corrupted, saith he, before Ezra's Time, (according to most of the Fathers) and therefore much more between Ezra and Christ, P. 12.  
Clemens Alexandrinus and most of the Fathers say, that the Scriptures were lost, not corrupted in Babylon, and restored by a Spirit of Inspiration by Ezra 
* Strom. l. 1. . The same is affirmed by Ireneus and Eusebius 
† Hist. Eccl. v. 8.  Admitting they were corrupted before Ezra's Time, of which there is no certainty, it does not follow they were corrupted after, because the Masora, which was invented in Ezra's Time, was an effectual means to preserve the Purity of them; this was my Third Argument, but the Rector takes no notice of it. Besides, the Captivity cured the Jews of their Idolatrous Disposition, and made them more Zealous for the Purity of the Law, as appears in the History of the Maccabees. He saith in his R. R. P. 22. the Hebrew Bibles were not corrupted in any material Thing till after the Destruction of Jerusalem, and now they were corrupted before the Birth of Christ.  
This Man cannot for his Life agree with himself. He overlooks several things in the Confirmation of my First Argument, with my Second and Third, and hopps to the Fourth Argument; That the Jews, neither could nor would corrupt the Hebrew Bibles.  
I proved they could not, because there was a Pure Copy in every Synagogue in the World, besides those in the Hands of the Christians, which would soon have detected an attempt of that kind. I Quoted Austin and Jerome in confirmation of the Argument; and I added that the watchful Providence of God would not have suffered such an attempt to prosper.  
He Answers only to this last Part of my Argument. That Providence has permitted various readings in the New Testament, p. 12. So it has in the old also, but what is this to the Jews making bold with the Scripture in prejudice to Christianity and corrupting them in very material Things, as the Rector affirms, R. R. P. 22. The various readings of Ben. Asher and Ben. Napthali are of uncertain Original, and Capellus himself, a more skilful improver of what may seem to impair the Authority of the Hebrew Text; confesses that they are trivial, and not in matters of any Moment.  
The Rector excepted against the Purity of the Hebrew from Justin Martyr, who charged the Jews with corrupting the Scriptures.  
I proved, that Justin Martyr speaks of the Greek Versions of the Bible, and quoted his Words at large. This the Rector cannot deny, but saith he, the Father examined not only the Copies used in the Jewish Synagogue (i. e. those of the LXX.) but in all likelihood Hebrew Copies too, p. 14.  
Justin no where mentions any Corruption of the Hebrew, but he expressly mentions the corrupting of the LXX. nor does the Rector; but suppose he examined the Hebrew Copies; He cannot affirm it, though he thinks he was acquainted with the Hebrew and Syriack. If I should grant he understood the Hebrew, it does not prove the Corruption of the Hebrew Text. But it is more probable he did not understand the Hebrew, because he mistakes the Etymology of Israel, which he derives from Isra a Man and el Strength, q. Homo vincens Virtutem. The Rector defends this Etymology, and saith by virtutem he means God the Strength of Israel, 1 Sam. 15.29. p. 13.  
He betrays his own Ignorance of the Hebrew, by vindicating Justin's skill in it, for Isra does not signify a Man in Hebrew. Ish signifies a Man, but Israel is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dominatus fuit praevaluit, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God, as Moses explains it, Gen. 32.28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, because as a Prince thou hast Power with God, as we well render it. Justin explains what he means by El 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Power, no other God but the God of this World, for he makes Jacob's Victory over the Angel a mysterious Representation of Christ's Victory over Satan, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Devil came to him, which is that Power which is called the Serpent and Satan.  

* Just. M. Diab. cum Tryph. p. 277, 278. Edit. Sylburg.  Justin's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the Devil, which the Rector by an unparallelled Blunder makes to signifies the true God, where he reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he only quotes the Text of the LXX, but does not professedly give the Signification of Israel, as he does in this Place.  
The Rector deserts his Vossian Argument of the Corruption of the Hebrew Chronology. He proposed it out of Vossius, and made the best Improvement he could of it, R. R. p. 25, 26. But now he is not at leisure to vindicate it, so that Vossius must shift for himself. And whereas the Rector positively affirmed Two. Thousand Years to be lost in the Chronology of our Hebrew Bible, and that the World must be Six Thousand Years Old when Christ came; I suggested, That he cannot prove that Christ is come in the Flesh, without rejecting the Authority of our English Bibles in Point of Chronology. The Rector Answers: He can prove it by the LXX, or he will suppose the Hebrew Chronology right, and then it is not necessary to follow the Jewish Principle of Six Thousand Years, p. 15.  
If the Rector prove it by the LXX, he renounces the Authority of our English Corrupt Bibles in Point of Chronology, which I said he must do by his Principle: If he admits the Hebrew Chronology, he rejects the LXX. I perceive he is unresolved which of the Two Chronologies to follow, but let him at his leisure choose which he pleases, he still confirms my Argument. As to the Instance of Cainan in Luc. 3. if the Rector be not satisfied with what Dr. Lightfoot offers, whom he does not fairly answer, let him consult Pol. Syn. Crit. or Gregory of Oxf. his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Dr. Fowler the present Bishop of Gloucester.  
The Rector thinks, that the true Reading of Deut. 32.8. aught to be according to the number of Angels, because Jerom read it so, p. 17.  
Jerom translated the LXX. into Latin, and sometimes reads according to the Hebrew Verity, sometimes according to the LXX. He arraigns the 1 Sam. 2.17. which he saith is Corrupted, and to be Corrected by the LXX, p. 17, 18.  
I have consulted the Place, and find a perfect Agreement between the Hebrew and the LXX. The Poor Man's fancy is so vitiated with Ideas of Corruption, that if he do but look into the Hebrew Text, it appears corrupt and impure unto him. He has dwelled so long upon this Subject, that he can scarce think of any thing else but Corruption, Corruption. The Thought is natural enough, if he applied it to the proper Subject, namely to his own Writings, and not to the inspired Volumes. He has found another Corruption in Deut. 33.6. where the Hebrew wants not, He adds, That the Critics take a great deal of Pains to patch up the Hebrew Verity, but without any Satisfaction to me, I profess, p. 18.  
I despair of satisfying this hypercritical Man, but for the Satisfaction of the Reader, I will take notice of two Things. 1. The Hebrew is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let his Men be a Number, which may be applied to a great Number, as well as a small, and so the Reading will be, Let his Men be many, and thus it agrees with the LXX, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Let me add, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be rendered Dead Men, so some translate the Word in Isa. 41.14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye Dead Men of Israel, and so the Reading will be, Let thy Dead Men be few. If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be rendered few, as it is by our Translators, and the Words are a Blessing and not a Curse, as he pretends they must be, if not be left out. 2. Not is frequently omitted in the Hebrew, and to be supplied from the foregoing Sentence, as in Isa. 28.27, 28. and 23.4. Psalm 91.4, 5. and 9.18. I desire the Learned Reader to consult these places in the Hebrew, many more might be mentioned to the same Purpose. It may be the Rector will say, these also are Corrupted.  
He takes notice that Jerom speaks doubtfully of two other Places in the Old Testament, as if they were Corrupted, p. 18.  
But Jerom does not positively affirm, as the Rector doth; by how much he was more Learned than the Rector, he was so much the more Modest. Jerom saith, We know not certainly, whether it was struck out of the ancient Copies, or added by the LXX. The Rector saith with a daring boldness, I have made good my Assertion, that the Hebrew Bibles have been Corrupted in all Ages, p. 19  
The Rector has a singular faculty in making good his Assertion, without either vindicating his own Arguments, or answering mine to the contrary. The Truth is, his Assertion is so very bad, that a more accomplished Artist than himself, would be at a loss how to make it good. It puts me in mind of a Story or King James the first, as some of his Nobles were exercising themselves at leaping, lays the King pleasantly to 'em, you talk of leaping, I would leap over yonder Wall, and pointed at a high Wall that was near 'em; Yes, Sir, says a Parasite that stood near him, I believe your Majesty could leap over it: Hold Man, replied the King, I did not say I could leap over it, but I would do it, that is, if I were able. The Rector shows his good Will to confirm his Assertion, and has made some feeble attempts in his R. R. to attack the Masora, the Fence of the Law 
* Masora est sepimentum legis. Elias Levita, , but the Wall is too high to be leaped over, and too strong to be broken down, and therefore in his Letter he wisely declines it, lest he should break his Shins, and be forced to a dishonourable Retreat.  
But is he in earnest, when he says the Hebrew Bibles have been corrupted in all Ages? And has he made this good? It seems all Ages are comprehended in the Time of Ezra and Justin Martyr for he mentions no more; and he has not proved, that they were corrupted then. Our Bible's must be Corrupt indeed, if every Age has been practising upon 'em. According to the Rector, it has been the Work of every Age to Corrupt the Bible. It's well, if he allows us any sound part in it, for that which has been always in the Corrupting, must be a very Corrupt Thing at last. The Rector swoued at least have paid as much deference to the Holy Bible, as he would to the Profane Works of Homer and Virgil, which none will say, have been corrupted in all Ages. It's a little unlucky, that this Man cannot quarrel with the Dissenters, but he must quarrel with the Bible also. He might have left the sacred Volumes alone, though he were disposed to reproach us. However he has one Consolation, that he is not singular in his Hypotheses, for he has Mahometans, Papists and Deists in his Interest, who unanimously charge our Scriptures with material Corruptions.  
I shall add one thing more, and I have done. The Rector's Letter which bears Date, April 8. 1699. came not to my Hands, until Aug. 16. nor did I hear any thing of it, before I saw it. I presume the Rector designed it for the Private Use of his Friend, of whose Candid Acceptance he was well assured, and not for such ill-natured People, as will take nothing upon Trust, but Critically examine his weak Reasonings, and vindicate themselves from his unjust Criminations. He published his Letter, as Aristotle did some of his Books, concerning which he saith, I made 'em Public, as if I had not made 'em Public 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gell. Noct. Attic. XX. 4. . He told us above, that his blind Evidence of the Cameronian Story may be sufficient for Private Conviction, though not to be allowed in Public Forms of Justice, p. 20. Perhaps this Epistle, which manifestly recedes from the Laws of Justice, was designed for Private Conviction. However, since it came accidentally to my Hands, and no return is made to it by his Utopian Friend, I have been so kind to the Rector, lest he should think himself slighted; as to Answer his Letter with all the plainness and faithfulness, which may seem necessary to regulate his Faith towards the Scriptures, and Charity towards his Brethren.  
FINIS.   

Books Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers-Chapel.  

Books written by the Reverend Mr. J. whither.  
OF Thoughtfulness for the Morrow. With an Appendix concerning the immoderate Desire of Foreknowing Things to come.  
Of Charity, in reference to other men's Sins.  
A Sermon Preached at the Funeral of Mr. Richard adam's, M. A. Sometime Fellow of Brasennose College, in Oxford.  
The Redeemer's Tears wept over lost Souls: In a Treatise on Luke 19.41, 42. With an Appendix, wherein somewhat is occasionally discoursed, concerning the Sin against the Holy Ghost, and how God is said to will the Salvation of them that perish.  
A Sermon directing what we are to do after a strict Enquiry, Whether or no we truly love God.  
A Funeral Sermon for Mrs. Esther Samson, the late Wife of Hen. Samson, Doctor of Physic, who died Nou. 24. 1689.  
The Carnality of Religious Contention. In two Sermons, Preached at the Merchant's Lecture in Broadstreet.  
A Sermon for Reformation of Manners.  
A Sermon Preached on the Day of Thanksgiving, Decemb. 2. 1697. To which is prefixed Dr. Bates' Congratulatory Speech to the KING.  
A Calm and Sober Enquiry, concerning the Possibility of a Trinity in the Godhead.  
A Letter to a Friend, concerning a Postscript to the Defence of Dr. Sherlock's Notion of the Trinity in Unity, relating to the Calm and Sober Enquiry upon the same Subject.  
A View of that part of the late Considerations to H. H. about the Trinity: Which concerns the Sober Enquiry on that Subject.   

Books written by J. Flavel.  
THE Fountain of Life opened, or a Display of Christ in his Essential and Mediatorial Glory. Containing Forty two Sermons on various Texts.  
A Treatise of the Soul of Man, wherein the Divine Original, Excellent and Immortal Nature of the Soul are opened, etc.  
The Method of Grace, in bringing home the Eternal Redemption, contrived by the Father, and accomplished by the Son, through the Effectual Application of the Spirit unto God's Elect.  
The Divine Conduct, or Mystery of Providence, etc.  
Navigation Spiritualised: Or, A new Compass for Seamen, etc.  
Two Treatises, the first of Fear; the second, the Righteous Man's Refuge in the Evil Day.  
A Saint indeed: The great Work of a Christian.  
A Touchstone of Sincerity: Or, Signs of Grace, and Symptoms of Hypocrisy: Being the Second Part of the Saint indeed.  
A Token for Mourners: Or, Boundaries for Sorrow for the Death of Friends.  
Husbandry Spiritualised: Or, the Heavenly Use of Earthly Things.  
Jehovah our Righteousness: Or the Justification of Believers by the Righteousness of Christ only, Asserted and Applied in several Sermons. By Sam. Tomlins, A. M.  
A most familiar Explanation of the Assemblies Shorter Catechism. By Jos. Allein.  
A Paraphrase on the New Testament, with Notes Doctrinal and Practical. By Mr. Richard Baxter.  
An Account of the Life and Death of Mr. Philip Henry Minister of the Gospel near Whitchurch in Shropshire.  
Sermons and Discourses on several Divine Subjects. By the late Reverend and Learned Divine Mr. David Clarkson, B. D. and sometime Fellow of Clare-Hall Cambridge. Folio.  
A Body of Practical Divinity, containing 176 Sermons upon the Assemblies Shorter Catechism. By Tho. Watson. Folio.