Version which are not to be met with in the Hebrew e. g. Psalm 137. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jeremy composed this Song I ask then is this Title Divinely inspired and yet Jerom Translates and Comments upon it p. 13. I Answers 1st The LXX Interpreters have added and diminished in abundance of Places besides the Titles of the Psalms It were easy to give hundr'ds of Instances of this kind Nothing can be infer'd from hence but that the Greek Interpreters took too Great a Liberty of varying from the Original Text. 2dly It is uncertain who composed the 137. Psalm nor is it material for us to know while we are satisfied he was divinely inspired Some conceive it was pen'd by David prophetically as Isajah wrote of the Burning of the Temple Isa 64. 11. So did Asaph of the Destruction of the City and Temple Psalm 79. and 74. Dr. Hamond is inclined to think it might be pen'd after the return from the Captivity and if so it cou'd not be by Jeremiah who was dead before 3dly The Addition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not in the Ancient Copies of the LXX as Hilary assures us for thus he speaks It seem'd good to some to prefix the Names of Jeremiah Haggai and Zechariah to the superscriptions of some Psalms but none of these are to be found in the Authentic Copies of the LXX Version * Horum nihil in authenticis LXX Translatorum Libris ita editum reperiatur Hil. in Psalm prol IV. His last Reason is The Oriental Versions the Syr. Arab. and Chaldee Paraphrase often wants Titles frequently change 'em and sometimes add Titles where Hebrew and Greek have none which cou'd never have happen'd if they had been Canonical Scripture The Chaldee Paraphrase on the Pentatuch by Onkelos and that on the Prophets by Jonathan which are thought to be written about the Times of Christ are not of that Authority as to bring the Hebrew Copy in question where they differ from it I confess they have their Use both for confirming the Purity of the Hebrew Text as in Gen. 3. 15. and the Illustration of it as in Gen. 4. 8. but especially in Controversies against the Jews where they bear Testimony to the Messiah as in Gen. 49. 10. Isa 45. 17 c. but where they differ from the Hebrew as they do in a great many Places we ought to prefer the Fountain before the Streams In the more obscure Places they follow the LXX Version as Munster observes †Praefat in Jonam and therefore can be of no greater Authority than the LXX They are not without some Jewish Fables as in Num. 21. 19. In some Places they depart from the Fountain of Truth the Hebrew Text as in Num. 23. 3. and in Deut. 4. 28. and 28. 64. where it is foretold that the Israelites shou'd serve other Gods the Chaldee Paraphrase transfers the Guilt of this upon the Heathen A great deal of this Nature will occur to the observant Reader The Targum or Paraphrase on the Hagiographa among which the Jews reckon'd the Psalms was made about the Year of Christ 600 and is of less Authority than the two Former This also varies from the Hebrew Text in multitudes of Places besides the Titles of the Psalms The Syriac which is Ancient tho' in many Places it follows the Hebrew yet in others it differs from it in several of which it follows the LXX The Arabic Version generally follows the Syriac | Prolegom in Pol. Synop. and therefore deserves no particular consideration So that this Argument of the Rector proves nothing in Prejudice of the Titles of the Psalms without affecting other Parts of Scripture which are differently rendred in the Oriental Versions Thus our Author by attempting to destroy the Titles of Psalm has produced an Argument which equally depreciates the Authority of most if not all the Books of the Old Testament Theodoret Censures some who thought the Inscriptions of the Psalms to be False 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And adds To me it seems great Rashness to alter the Inscriptions which were in being in the Time of Ptolomy who reigned in Egypt after Alexander and were Translated by the LXX Elders into the Greek Tongue as was the rest of the Holy Scripture * Theod. proefat in Psalm The Rector adds that there is not one Title in the Hebrew which is at all useful to the unfolding any Mysteries relating to Jesus Christ p. 15. This is confidently spoken after his Manner but the Ancient Fathers were of another Mind They apply the Title of the 22d Psalm to Jesus Christ To the Chief Musician upon Aijeleth Shahar i e. the Morning Hind so Jerom explains it Jesus Christ saith he is the only Hind or Deer who destroys Serpents and takes away Poysons as is Evident by the Contexture of the whole Psalm †Sed nos cervum nullum alium nisi Christum intelligimus sicus-totius Psalmi contextus ostendit Hieron in Psal Tom. VIII He is follow'd by the greatest part of our modern Learned Commentators The LXX render it for the Morning Assumption and this saith the same Learned Father signifies the Mystery of the Resurrection and Ascention of Jesus Christ unto the Father | Hier. ibid. Theodores also applies this Title to Jesus Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Morning Assumption is the appearance of our Saviour who did shine as the Morning upon them that sat in Darkness for the Lord is the true Light § Theod. in Psal 22. They apply the Title of the 30th Psalm a Psalm at the Dedication of the House of David to the Incarnation of Jesus Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Dedication of the House the Renovation of the human Nature which our Lord Christ perfected when he dyed for us and destroy'd Death and gave us hope of a blessed Resurrection * Theod. in Psal 29. Gr. To the same purpose speaks Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Spiritual meaning signifies the Assuming of a Human Body by the Divine Word and the Title refers to the Dedication of that House which was built a new and in a wonderful manner †Basil in loc They apply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Greek Title of several Psalms we render the Hebrew Chief Musician to the Resurrection and the End of the World | Vid. Basil hom in Psal 44. and 45. and 48. Had the Rector been as conversant with Jesus Christ as the Ancient Fathers were he might have found him even in the Titles of the Psalms Others of them direct us to the Author Occasion Intention and Use of the Psalm which greatly contribute to the right Understanding of it Some others refer to the Meter and Instruments on which they were to be Sung These the Hebrew Doctors confess their Ignorance of But it does not follow if some of them be unintelligible to us that all ought to be expung'd out of the
saith he the excellency of it's moral Precepts the high Strains and noble Flights of Piety prove not that it was written by inspiration for then Plato Seneca Ignatius Clement Romanus the VII wise Men of Greece c. might lay claim to inspiration Would you think it that a Protestant Divine should talk thus ignorantly of the blessed Scriptures Are the Precepts in Plato and Seneca as Excellent as those of the Holy Bible Can he find such high Strains and noble Flights of Piety in Pagan Authors as in the inspired Writings A Man that has felt the Power of God's Word renewing quickning comforting and strengthening his Heart will acknowledge the vast Difference between inspired and humane Writings and resolve his Faith into the Authority of God who speaks powerfully and feelingly unto our Consciences by his Spirit in the Scriptures which have Signatures of their Divine Original upon them that no Book besides can lay claim to Tradition is of Use to beget in us a good Opinion of the Scripture but he that makes it a Rule of Faith especially the first and leading Rule as the Rector seems to do resolves his Faith into a humane Authority which can beget but a Humane Faith Divine Faith is founded upon a Divine Testimony and a Humane Testimony can produce but a Humane Faith * Vinc. Lerin adv haeres Lerinensis his Rule about Tradition is quod omnes ubique semper All the Faithful have not at all times and in every Place transmitted every Book of Scripture as of Divine Authority The Popish Church pretend Tradition for the Apocrypha which they receive as Canonical Few of the People are able to judge of the Rule whether it be True or False Ministers may tell 'em of it suppose they receive their Dictates which few are able to Examin they believe with an Implicite Faith because their Ministers say so and thus the Subordinate Rule becomes the first and leading Rule Creeds Canons Dictates of wise and good Men and the like are either agreeable to the Scripture or they are not If they be not they are far from being Rules of Divine Faith for they are Rules of Error and Falshood If they are agreeable to the Scripture we believe and receive them because they are Consonant to the Word of God the only Rule of saving Divine Faith We will allow 'em to be helps unto our Faith but judge it very improper to call 'em Rules of Faith I told the Rector That the laying aside the Un-scriptural Terms of Communion which have been the fatal Engines of Disunion and Schism wou'd soon heal us To this he Answers 1 The Experiment has been once made in the late Times but without Success Divisions were increased c. Things were in a fair way of healing when the Concessions of King Charles I. were voted satisfactory by the Parliament had not a Faction in the Army put all out of Course and governed the Nation by a very Arbitrary Power and yet there were very hopeful beginnings of a Coalition between the moderate Episcopal Presbyterian and Congregational Brethren upon the Principle I mention between the years 1652 and 1659 as appears by the Worcester-shire Association as also by those of Cumberland Westmorland Essex c. which are to be seen in Print If this Principle did not heal us in those distracting and unsettled Times it does not follow that it would not do it now in a State of Settlement and such a Settlement wherein the Bishops are in Power under whom the moderate Dissenters wou'd not scruple to Exercise their Ministry if the offensive Terms were removed out of the way And if ever our unhappy Breaches be healed it must be upon this Principle which has been asserted by the Great Men of the Episcopal Communion †Iren. Pref. Dr. Stillingfleet the present Biship of Worcester declares against Vn-scriptural Impositions He that came to take away the Un-scriptural Yoke of Jewish Ceremonies certainly did never intend to Gall the Back of his Disciples with another instead of it And it would be strange the Church should require more than Christ himself did What possible Reason can be assign'd why such Things shou'd not be sufficient for Communion with a Church which are sufficient for Eternal Salvation Without all Controversy the main In-let of all the Distractions Confusions and Divisions in the Christian World hath been by adding of other Conditions of Church Communion than Christ hath made My Lord Bacon saith that the ancient and true Bounds of Unity are one Faith one Baptism and not one Ceremony one Policy * Resusc par 1. p. 129. The same was the Judgment of King James the I. In non necessariis libertati Christianae locus detur †Is Casaub ep ad Card Peron See Mr. Tallents's healing Book of large Foundations wherein you may find more Testimonies to this purpose 2. The Rector perscribes the method of healing us and that is to obey them that have the Rule over us in all lawful things i. e. which are not forbidden by God The meaning is if I understand him that Church Rulers have Power to impose Things lawful i. e. not forbidden as Terms of Communion and that it is our Duty to obey such impositions This Explication permised I answer 1. He ought to prove that Christ hath Commission'd our Church Rulers to fix un-scriptural Terms of Christian Communion before he prove it our Duty to obey ' em Where they have no power to command I see not our obligation to obey The grand Commission saith Dr. Stillingfleet the Apostles were sent out with was only to teach what Christ had Commanded them Not the least intimation of any Power given to impose or require any thing beyond what himself had spoken to them or they were directed to by the immediate Guidance of the Spirit of God * Iren ubi supra It is not whether the things required be lawful or not but whether they do consult for the Churches Peace and Unity who suspend it uopn such Things How far the Example of our Saviour or his Apostles doth warrant such rigorous Impositions We never read the Apostles making Laws but of Things supposed necessary 2. He ought to shew that all Things not forbidden may lawfully be imposed as Terms of Communion The use of Oyl Spittle Salt Cream c. are not forbidden in Baptism therefore the Rector wou'd submit to the Use of them if his Rulers think fit to enjoyn them as is done in Popery Holy Water is not forbidden nor are any of the Ceremonies used in Popery expresly Prohibited in Scripture therefore they are lawful to the Rector You see whither this Hypothesis tends Sitting at the Lords Supper is not forbidden no more is Prostration the humblest Gesture of Adoration the Rector would scarce like it if either of these were rigidly imposed 3. Who must judge what is Lawful what not If those that obey we are but where we were that
Devotion I will conclude with Fuller 's Censure An verò os aliquod impurum dicere ausit c. But dare any foul mouth affirm that either those Versions Gr. Lat. or the Catholick Church which hath approved them for so many Ages have conspired in so horrid a wickedness with the perfidious enemies of Jesus Christ Full. Miscell Theol. lib. 3. cap. 13. III. The Rector believes upon Vossius 's Judicious Authority that the Hebrew Chronology is corrupted his Argument is this The Jews believ'd their Messiah wou'd come about the 6000 Year from the Creation that the World was 6000 Years old when Christ came that the Ancient Hebrew Copies reckoned 6000 Years from Adam to Jesus else the Jews cou'd not have expected the Messiah when Jesus was born if their Chronology had been the same as it is this day from the whole it must be confessed that the Modern Hebrew Copies are corrupted the World according to them being at the Birth of Jesus but about 4000 Years old p. 25 26. The Rector barely proposes this Argument but neither explains nor attempts to prove the parts of it I 'll briefly examine each of them 1. It cannot be prov'd that the Ancient Jews expected their Messiah about the 6000 Year of the World Vossius endeavours to prove it from a Talmudical Tradition which the Jews ascribe to Elias and Vossius believes to be Elias the Prophet The Tradition of the house of Elias is this The World shall last Six Thousand Years two Thousand Years before the Law two Thousand Years of the Law and two Thousand Years of the time of the Messiah but for our iniquities which are many those Years are pass'd and lapsed Mundus constrabit c. In Tract Sanhedr Is Vossius begins these 6000 Years from the Floud and so reckons forward to the Birth of Christ but he ought to begin from the Creation for the Tradition speaks of the Age of the World that it shou'd last six thousand Years alluding to the six days of the Creation accounting 1000 to answer each day His reason for reckoning from the Floud is taken from 2 Pet. 3. 6. who calls the Old World the World that then was This is nothing to the point in hand for the Question is not whether the Antediluvian World may be so call'd but whether Elias intended to exclude that State of the World or the time before the Floud from being concern'd in this Tradition This neither is nor can be prov'd Now if we reckon the 6000 Years from the beginning of the Creation it 's co-incident with the Chronology of our Hebrew Bibles which make the World about 4000 Years old when Christ was born and so doth this Tradition for it assigns 2000 years before the Law and 2000 years under the Law at the end of which it makes the Messiah to come The Truth is This is a Rabbinical Figment and no Prophecy of Elias as Vossius affirms without proof Perhaps the Author might be some Talmudic Doctor of that Name It gives a false account of the time before the Law which was about 2450 Years and of the time under the Law which was about 1500 Years and not 2000 as he affirms Some have calculated the Duration of the World by this pretended Prophecy and have been so vain as to affirm that the Last Judgment will be at the end of 6000 Years from the Creation grounding their Opinion upon this Rabbinical Tradition Besides the Jews acknowledge that the time of the Coming of the Messiah is already past tho' he be hid from them for their sins This is inconsistent with their defalking 2000 Years from the Chronology of the Hebrew Bible that they may perswade the World the time of his appearance is not yet come They are sensible enough that the time of the Messia's coming is lapsed whatever some of them may say to the contrary and therefore they pronounce a solemn Curse upon the Computers of Times Malè pereunt say the Talmudists qui temporum articulos suppetunt quibus venturus est Messiah Let their Bones rot says R. Jonathan who compute the times of the end 2. It can't be prov'd that the World was 2000 years old when Christ came According to the Hebrew Copies which I have prov'd incorrupt the World was about 4000 years old when the Son of God was manifested in the Flesh There is no reason why we shou'd esteem the Greek Chronology before the Hebrew Bibles It 's absurd to prefer a Translation to the Original the Streams to the Fountain Even those that follow the Lxx Chronology do not make the World 6000 Years old when Christ came Theophilus Antiochen and the Oriental Church reckon about 5507 from the Creation to the Birth of Christ Ad Antolyc lib. 3. Nicephorus reckons 5505. Eccl. Hist I. 10. We are sure the Greek Chronology has been either corrupted very early or falsified by the Lxx Translators for it makes Methuselah to live 14 Years after the Floud hence came that famous Question where to lodge him all the time of the Floud Some held as St. Austin observes that he was with his Father Enoch who was translated This they held adds he as being loth to derogate from the Authority of those Books which the Church hath entertained into more renowned Authority and thinking that the Books of the Jews rather than these do mistake and err For they say it s not credible that the Lxx Interpreters which translated at one time and in one sense could err or would lye or err where it concern'd them not but that the Jews for envy they bear us have chang'd some things in their Books that the Authority of our might be lessen'd This is their Opinion his own he gives a little after Let that Tongue be rather believ'd out of which a Translation is made into another by Interpreters And in the next Chap. chap. 14. The Truth of things must be fetch'd out of that Tongue out of which that that we have is interpreted Aug. de Civit. Dei xv 11. 13 14. It is true the Fathers generally follow'd the Greek Chronology and how cou'd they do otherwise since few of 'em were able to read the Bible in Hebrew 3. The ancient Hebrew Copies did not reckon 6000 Years from Adam to Jesus as the Rector affirms They reckon'd as we do now as appears by the Copy which Jerom used of which he gives this account That where the Greek Translation saith the Patriarches before the Floud were so many years above two hundred years old when they begat such a Son the Hebrew Copy sâ—ith they were so many years above one hundred years old So that the 100 years which are added to the lives of the Antediluvian Patriarchs in the Lxx Version which make about 600 Years in all were not in the Ancient Hebrew Copies Sciendum quod utque ad c. Hieron in quoest seu Tradit Hebr. proem But saith the Rector out of Vossius The Jews cou'd