Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	church_n	england_n	entitle_v	1,993	5	10.1542	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B04473	A clear confutation of Mr. Richard Allen, and his five commendators, from their own confessions, collected out of the vindication of his essay, and fairly improv'd against them, to the overthrow of their conjoined singing in artificial tunes in gospel-worship. To which is added, an answer to Mr. William Collins's defence from the charge exhibited against him in my book, entituled, The controversie of singing brought to an end, &c.	Marlow, Isaac.; Marlow, Isaac. The controversie of singing brought to an end.	1696 (1696)	Wing M692B; ESTC R180372	25,446	47

so or does account them indifferent Circumstances yet he does not use them in his church as accidental or circumstantial parts of a common civil action as such but of his Divine Worship and therefore whatever he calls them they are essentials of it for there are no circumstances of worship but what are essential to the compleat performance of it It 's true there are Circumstances attending Worship that are not of Worship but of actions meerly as such as one particular fixed hour of the day for Christians to meet together does attend the time and place of their Worship but one particular prefixed hour is but a circumstance of the action of meeting as such and so no essential circumstance of Worship as time and place is for another hour may serve as well but without the circumstances of time and place the Worship it self cannot be And notwithstanding Mr. Allen tells us plainly that artificial Tunes Metre and Rhime are not essential to singing yet I perceive that he himself in effect makes them essential to it For he says that 't is his Opinion that to sing in Rhime and Metre is more easie to be performed in an harmonious and regular manner than in prose and that singing in artificial tunes is requisite for the more regular performance of it Now is not that which is requisite for the more regular performing of that Worship essential to it seeing it is not so regular without it Surely if artificial Tunes Rhime and Metre are either his Rule or make his Rule of Singing whatever it be more perfect for that Worship they must needs belong unto it and be essential to the more compleat performance of it than without those modes and circumstances Sixthly To me it seemeth plain that Mr. Allen's terms of accidental modes and circumstances are only to gild over his Error that our People may the easier swallow it down and how much he writes after the Copy of the Church of England in the preface to the Book of Common-Prayer appears from the following Citation out of it For it 's there said That the particular forms of Divine Worship and the Rites and Ceremonies appointed to be used therein being things in their own nature indifferent and alterable and so acknowledged it is but reasonable that upon weighty and important Considerations according to the various exigency of Times and Occasions such Changes and Alterations should be made therein as to those that are in place of Authority should from time to time seem either necessary or expedient And concerning their Ceremonies that have had their beginning by the Institution of Man 't is there further said That those that remain are retained for Discipline and Order which upon just causes may be altered and changed and therefore are not to be esteemed equal with God's Law From whence I Observe 1. That as t is ' said the particular Forms of the Service of the Church of England are things in their own nature indifferent and alterable so Mr. Allen makes his singing in Rhime and Metre and by artificial Tunes but indifferent things that are alterable for he says that singing the Divine Praises may be performed without them as well as a Person may be rightly baptized after another manner than with his face upward pag. 13 82. 2. That as the Ceremonies of the Church of England originally instituted by Man are for Discipline and Order so Mr. Allen says That all the accidental Modes and Circumstances of Divine Worship must be ordered suitable to the general Rules thereof viz. saith he so as may be most for Order and Edification page 81. 3. As the Ceremonies of the Church of England are not to be esteemed equal with God's Law so Mr. Allen calls his ways of singing in rhime and metre and by artificial tunes with conjoin'd voices but accidental modes and circumstances that he asserts are not equal with the essential parts of Divine Worship prescribed in the Word of God 4. The same Scripture that is used in the preface to the Book of Common-prayer for their Ceremonies is used in Mr. Allen's Essay page 88. for his mode of singing in artificial tunes 1 Cor. 14.40 Let all things be done decently and in order which to understand otherwise than of the Order and Decency prescribed in the Word and before laid down in the Rule of Worship in the same Chapter is a Subversion of the Word of God 5. I may also add That as the Church of England did formerly press their Forms and Ceremonies of Worship under the Notion of indifferent things upon the Consciences of the Dissenters who by no means could be made to swallow them down tho' gilded over with their Terms so tho' Mr. Allen has declared against imposing of his accidental modes and circumstances of Worship yet he and his Companions have so far followed the former steps of the Church of England as to press their modes and circumstances which they own are no essential parts of Gospel-worship so hard upon our Churches as to occasion many Troubles and Distractions among us So that Mr. Allen and his five Companions agree so well with the Preface to the Book of Common-prayer about the nature of humane modes and circumstances of Worship that we have reason to believe they have learnt their Notions from the Church of England whereby they are infecting our Churches with such Principles as will naturally lead them to conform at least to their worship Seventhly I shall take some Notice of what Mr. Allen refers us to in page 81. Where he tells us that he has shewn the Difference between the parts of Divine Worship and the accidental modes and ways of its performance in his foregoing page 15. And in page 47. speaking of those accidental modes and circumstances of Divine Worship as are not particularly prescribed in the Word he says That there are many such every one must needs know whereof some instances saith he have been given pag. 15. where I find Mr. Allen mentioneth the three following particulars 1. He there saith For a Man to provide for his Family all I presume saith he will grant to be a Christian yea a Moral Duty but 't is at the Liberty of every man's choice in what just way he doth it whether by the use of this or the other Art or Trade Answer What is this to our case of Divine Worship because every man has liberty to choose and use what lawful Art or Trade he pleaseth for the maintenance of his Family therefore must Christians have so great a Liberty to choose and practise what accidental modes and circumstances of Worship they please If this be granted then if our Churches please they may practice not only common Singing but the Common Service of the Church of England Common-Prayer Common Baptism or Sprinkling of Infants Common Gossips to Answer for them Kneeling at the Altar and at Confession and Absolution Bowing to the East and Name of Jesus and may

A CLEAR CONFUTATION OF Mr. Richard Allen And his Five Commendators From their own Confessions collected out of the Vindication of his Essay and fairly improv'd against them to the Overthrow of their Conjoined Singing in Artificial Tunes in Gospel-Worship To which is added An Answer to Mr. William Collins's Defence from the Charge exhibited against him in my Book Entituled The Controversie of Singing brought to an end c. THere being so much already said in my former Treatises to the Argumentative Part of the Controversie of Singing and having in my last Discourse I published brought it to an End for my own part I see but little or nothing else to do than to clear it at the end and so to finish my present Testimony for the Truth And that I may do it the more effectually I shall first answer some few Exceptions in Mr. Allen's Reply to me which I think are most material to clear the way for a full Confutation of his Error from his own Confessions And 1. Mr. Allen saith in page 59. That there is no Evidence in the Text Exod. 15.21 that either these Dances or Musical Instruments were used by them in the Church of God as such but those Dances of the Women with Musick mentioned ver 20. seem plainly to be spoken of as a Consequence of their Religious Thanksgiving in the Church-Assembly mentioned in the foregoing part of the Chapter Answer I have sufficiently proved in my last as well as in my other Treatises of singing that Deborah and Barak did not sing vocally together For 1. Some part of the Song Judges 5.7 viz. until that I Deborah arose that I arose a Mother in Israel was not proper for Barak to express 2. 'T is said ver 12. Awake awake Deborah awake awake utter a Song Arise Barak and lead thy captivity captive thou Son of Abinoam which Expressions shew that this Song was uttered by Deborah and part of it to Barak and so all of it was not proper matter for Barak to express and also that this was sung at the same time before Barak had led his captivity away and yet in ver 1. 't is said Then sang Deborah and Barak c. and so in Exod. 15.1 Then sang Moses and the Children of Israel yet it does not follow that the Children of Israel sang all vocally together any more than that Deborah and Barak sang with conjoin'd voices which we find they did not neither does it from thence follow that the Womens singing with Timbrels and Dances seperate from the Men Exod. 15.20 was afterwards at a different Season any more than if we should against the Light of Scripture suppose that Barak join'd in spirit with Deborah in the chiefest part of her Song at a different Season or after he had led his captivity away Besides as there is nothing expressed that lays a foundation for this Objection so there is reason to believe that the Women sang with Timbrels and Dances at the same time when Moses and Israel sang v. 1. seeing that as 't is said Moses and Israel sang to the Lord so also Miriam began the Song to the Lord which shews that Miriam's and the Womens singing was as much a religious Thanksgiving to the Lord as the Children of Israel's was ver 1 c. and at the same season and not afterwards 2. To what Mr. Allen in page 59. says concerning my Authors which shew the signification of the Greek Word Hymneo which is simply to praise or give thanks and also to lament or complain I shall here answer 1. That he plainly owns that the word Hymneo is not limited in its signification to Songs of Praise but he strives to prove that its most proper signification is to sing praise which I deny and have produced witness enough against it and there is no need to contend about it seeing our last Translators have rendred the Hebrew Word Tehillah and the Greek Word Hymnos in the Old Testament simply Praise 2. By his picking out of several of my Authors which render the word Hymneo various ways some expressions that renders it to sing a Hymn or Praise and by his improving those that speak most in this Language he has laboured to raise a dust that their Testimony should not be so clearly discerned But Observe he has not neither can he charge me with any false Citation of them and so cannot destroy the Evidence I bring them for nor the fuller and clearer Testimony of the rest of my Authors that are noted in my little Tract where I have only briefly mentioned them and not largely cited the Evidence of several of them whose Testimonies were more fully given before in my prelimited Forms and in my Reply to Mr. Keach to which I refer the Reader if he please for further Satisfaction in this and many other matters that I could not treat of in so small a Tract on Singing as I lately published with my Remarks on Mr. Allen's Essay But 3. Mr. Allen says page 61. That the Learned Mr. 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 Answ 'T is true Mr. Ainsworth says that there be three kinds of Songs in that Book of Psalms viz. Psalms Hymns and Songs but tho' he calls them all Songs whatever Titles they bare yet it is because they were all Songs for Temple-worship and not from the signification of every Title for some of the Psalms viz. Psalm 17 and 86 and 90 and 102. are entituled a Prayer of David of Moses c. which denote the nature of those Psalms or Temple-Songs to be Prayer and not that they are Songs from their Title of Prayer and so the word in Hebrew Tehillah Greek Hymnos signifies the nature of the Psalm or Song to be a Praise as the word is simply and rightly translated by Mr. Ainsworth who translates it in the Psalms and renders the word in his Annotations on them in eight several places singly or simply to praise See Psal 40.3 Psal 65.1 Psal 71.6 Psal 119.171 Psal 148.14 Annot. Psal 1. An. Ps 145. An. Psal 3. and I cannot find that he renders it in any one place a Song of Praise or to sing praise but singly to praise And therefore Mr. Allen has done ill to joyn with Mr. Collins against my former complaint which is now justly against them both with the rest of their Companions for abusing my Author in so plain a case as renders them very unfair in their dealing with me 4. Mr. Allen in page 71. says The Divine Psalmists do often not only speak of their own singing the Divine Praises but also call upon others to joyn with them therein see Psal 9.2 11. and 27.6 and 145.7 and 146.1 2. c.

wounds to confirm the minds of their Brethren whom they have shaken and to satisfie all that are concerned with sincere Acknowledgements of their Errors and Hearty Assurances that hereafter they will joyn with their Brethren against all Innovations in Gospel-worship and Defilements of Humane Inventions whatsoever And in so doing our Churches will have cause to give thanks to God for their Recovery And their Objection against my present being no Member of any Church the occasion whereof is so well known as that they do not neither can they justly blame me for it I hope will quickly be removed for excepting some of them whose Churches differ in Profession and are not in Comnion with the rest of their Churches as I know of 't is they and other Singers that have so muddied the Communion of their Churches that I cannot with Satisfaction of Conscience joyn my self to any of them until I see a Reformation The foregoing matters being concluded I shall now proceed to answer Mr. William Collins's Defence at the end of Mr. Allen's Vindication of his Essay But before I treat thereof I shall here premise That the practice of singing with united voices of Men and Women Professors and Prophane in the Worship of God in his Gospel-Church being first preached up and vehemently prest upon us by several of our Brethren and asserted in Print to the view of all men I thought it necessary for the preservation of the Peace and Purity of the Baptized Churches to present them with some Arguments against that way of Worship which notwithstanding they were offered in a Christian manner and were consonant to the Principles of our Churches yet several of our Singers have appeared in print against me in such a subtil Spirit of Injustice Deceit and Lying as hath cost me much Labour Time and Money out of my own private Purse to maintain the Truth and Common Cause and Interest of our Churches from being crush'd by them an Account whereof has been already given in Print so far as hath been thought sufficient to answer the Calls of Providence and to clear my Books from those false Representations of my Principles about Singing gross Abuses and foul Untruths published in Mr. Keach's Breach Repaired and other Pamphlets in wrong to me and my Printed Treatises which Abuses being justly charged upon him and them in Print many of them under the Hands of several Pastors of Churches and several particular things by nine other Brethren they still remain unanswered on so clear a Record as that they have not since in more than four years time appear'd in vindication of themselves And the reason why they have not done it may easily be perceived for the matter charg'd upon them is in their own Books and so cannot be stifled from the knowledge of any that will take the Trouble to look into it But to proceed my chief Business being to give an Answer to Mr. William Collins's Defence and to clear my self from his Slander I shall here recite Mr. Collins's Words which are the ground of my Charge against him and are as follows Saith he The Author which Mr. M. cites out of Marlorate on Mat. 26.30 pretends it is uncertain with what words they praised God that is whether it was with the common Passover Hymn or some other of Christs own which might be more suitable to the occasion and whether they saug this Praise or spake it simply the following Words of the Author not being well rendred by Mr. Timme I shall set down they are these Graecum verbum laudem quidem maxime quae Deo debetur includit non autem necessario evincit quòd cecinerint i. e. The Greek Word indeed includes praise chiefly that which is due to God but undoubtedly it doth evince that they sang 1. From the genuine signification of the Original Word And 2. From the Current of Learned men who go this way Thus the Latine was falsly Englished for it should be as it was afterwards altered by them in a few of those Books but it doth not necessarily evince that they sang which is the same in sence as my Author Mr. Timme reads it viz. but it doth not thereupon follow that they did sing it Now as to the Correction that was made after this Abuse was taken notice of abroad the whole Paragraph was not taken away as it ought to have been neither was the former part of it at all altered which discovers the Design of Mr. Collins to deceive his unlearned Reader with a false Translation of the Latine as plainly appears from the Paragraph 1. Because for Mr. Collins to tell us that Mr. Timme had not well rendred Marlorate's Latine when he had rendred his true sence he must needs do it on purpose to deceive his unlearned Reader with his false translation of it for otherwise seeing Mr. Timme had done it in the right sence there was no need at all for Mr. Collins to write that Paragraph against him 2. If the word not had only been left out in Mr. Collins's English we might have imputed it to be the Printers fault but we also find that Mr. Collins saith that Mr. Timme pretended it is uncertain whether they sang that Praise or spake it simply and then in contradiction to him he asserts That undoubtedly it doth evince that they sang 3. 'T is plain that the word not was left out on purpose to deceive the unlearned Reader because there is no Reason to believe that Mr. Collins did design positively to affirm from Marlorate's Latine That Christ and his Disciples did not sing the Hymn after Supper by translating the Latine falsly to give an undoubted Testimony against his own Cause but to make his unlearned Reader believe that undoubtedly they did sing when he knew in his Conscience that the Latine leaves it undetermined saying only That it doth not necessarily evince or shew that they sang Mat. 26.30 Moreover I well remember that I told Mr. Collins between him and me alone of his abusing my Author and he excused it with laying the fault upon the Printer but I answered that tho' Printers sometimes correct Words yet they never use to add a whole Paragraph to their Authors Books and therefore I said it look'd like a design'd Abuse to which he made me no answer and so we parted And as to the Correction that was made in some few of those Books to cover the Deceit from me at first it was not of the former part of the Paragraph for the alteration began at the last Clause of the Englishing the Latine And I have yet reason to complain that it was no sufficient satisfaction for the wrong done me because some time after it was told me that this Abuse was corrected I desired my Brother Mr. Luke Leader to go to Mr. Keach for one of them and my Brother testifies that Mr. Keach took down several of those Books from off the Shelf before he could find one that was corrected

and to my own knowledge since it was pretended they were corrected some of those Books were in other places exposed to publick sale uncorrected Besides I have also seen and can produce two others of those Books that are testified to be lately bought at Mr. Keach's or of his Daughters that sold them in their Shop in the months of June and July last 1696. that have this abuse remaining in them uncorrected in the last leaf of the Book which might easily have been removed if they would Having thus recited the matter of Fact tho' not in the same Order as it was printed before I shall here take some notice of Mr. Collins's Defence that he makes for himself at the end of Mr. Alllen's Vindication of his Essay And 1. I Observe that Mr. Collins owns that he wrote that sheet of Paper viz. at the end of Mr. Keach's Breach repaired 2. He acknowledgeth there was a false Translation of a Latine Passage in it but says that this was done by the Overseer of the Press who altered the truth of his Translation And by this he also owns himself to be the Author of that Paragraph the former part whereof which proves that he design'd to make that false Translation he makes no Answer to 3. He tells us that he strictly enjoined the Author of the Book viz. Mr. Benjamin Keach that the leaf wherein it was should be reprinted and that a Letter was immediately sent to me to let me know that this false Translation was not in his Copy and yet notwithstanding this that I falsly in Print charge him with this Translation And he also says that this willful Sin he laid to my Charge before an Assembly of Elders and Messengers at Devonshire-Square Meeting House some years ago where being Self-condemned as he saith I had to the best of his remembrance nothing to say in my own Defence This being the Sence and Substance of Mr. Collins's Defence my Answer follows And 1. To what he says of a Letter being sent me I must return him this Answer viz. That I have not the least knowledge of any such Letter that was ever sent me or came to my Hands from him or any other Person whatsoever concerning that matter But if it had been so yet his Evidence in this case had been no better than what he has now presented to us in print and is disproved by the former part of his own Paragraph which is as clear a Testimony as if there had been an hundred personal Witnesses against him And therefore the main part of his Defence which is that he corrected the English and added the word not which was left out does not at all clear him from my charge grounded on the former part of his Paragraph viz. That he wrote it and consequently did falsly English that Latine on purpose to abuse my Author and deprive his unlearned Reader of that sound Testimony of the true signification of the Greek Word Hymneo in Mat. 26.30 In the next place my business is to clear my self from the latter part of Mr. Collins's Defence where he says that this willful Sin viz. of charging him with this false Translation he laid to my Charge before an Assembly of Elders and Messengers at Devonshire-square Meeting-House some years ago where being self-condemned as he saith I had to the best of his Remembrance nothing to say in my own Defence To which I Answer 1. That that Assembly of Elders and Messengers at Devonshire-square Meeting-House which Mr. Collins speaks of was in the Year 1692. and was the first time that such a general Assembly met in that place that ever I heard of or was concerned with and since that I have not been present at any such Assembly and therefore what Mr. Collins asserts concerning my self-condemnation cannot relate to any other time 2. Through the unrighteous Clamour and Influence of Mr. William Collins and Mr. Benjamin Keach with the help of some of their Friends the Names of my two Books or Reply and Nartive bound up in one Book in answer to Mr. Keach were printed in a Paper to which was put the Names of seven Brethren who in that Paper determined That none of the Members of the Churches do buy give or disperse any of these Books say they aforesaid under writ But as my Name was not at all mentioned in that printed Paper so there was no particular matter or thing charged in it on me or any of my Books in wrong to any Person or Books whatsoever Besides in the same printed Paper those seven Brethren did there own that they had not seen my Books which they had there censured and determined that I should call them in and leave them to their dispose insomuch as it does appear that this sower contrivance of foisting the Names of my Books in at the end of that Paper which propely concerned other Persons and Books therein named and not mine which they own they had not then seen was not to relieve Mr. Keach and Mr. Collins from any wrong done to them by me or any of my Books but to stifle my Testimony for the truth that was then coming forth in my large Reply to Mr. Keach's Breach repaired and that his Abusive Book might have the freer course to advance their singing among the Churches Therefore I desire it may be well considered whether there is any reason to believe that I was self-condemned for falsly accusing Mr. William Collins when those seven Brethren in their printed paper laid no particular matter or thing in wrong to any person unto my charge Nor does Mr. Collins in his Defence pretend they did What reason then is there to imagine that at the same time I should in apparent wrong to my self condemn my self especially considering that as soon as I could after I had knowledge that my Books were so abused in that paper by those seven Brethren I drew up and printed some Remarks on it in vindication of my self and to clear my Books from that Injustice which Remarks have never yet been answered Surely therefore this carries a demonstration that I was not self-condemned and that Mr Collins's Assertion of it is a contrived Lye a Confirmation whereof you have as follows AT the Request of Mr. Isaac Marlow who desired me to testifie what I remember of what past in the General Assembly of the Messengers of the Baptized Churches in they year 1692. concerning him I do hereby declare that I do remember there was then some Discourse that pass'd from him and Mr. William Collins about some matter of Difference between them two But I do not remember that there was any thing spoken to Mr. Marlow aforesaid by the Elders and Brethren then present by which it might seem as if they judged him self-condemned And I do believe they did not see any reason to charge him with the same neither was there any conclusion made by them against him tending to any such thing for had