Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	ceremonial_a	law_n	moral_a	2,252	5	9.4056	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48172	A Letter to a friend in the country concerning the use of instrumental musick in the worship of God in answer to Mr. Newte's sermon preach'd at Tiverton in Devon on the occasion of an organ being erected in that parish-church.	Newte, John, 1655?-1716. Lawfulness and use of organs in the Christian Church.	1698 (1698)	Wing L1650; ESTC R24003	96,894	98

to use them For they under the Mosaical oeconomy had an express command for the use of them and if that Command be not vacated but continue in force still then say I it is a Duty still and not meerly a thing Lawful But he will prove Instrumental Musick to have been no part of the Ceremonial Law and that by Two Arguments His First Argument is 1. Because it was in use before the Law was given And here he accosts us again with the Instance of Miriam Exod. 15.20 But I have said enough to take off the force of this Objection in Answer to his First Argument for the Lawfulness of Instrumental Musick in Christian Worship Dancing was used before the giving of the Law in this Authors sense The same may be said of Sacrificing and Circumcision But will our Author affirm these to have been no part of the Ceremonial Law I cannot suppose he will 2. Because Instrumental Musick was not Established any where by the Law Ser. p. 22 33. nor till above Five hundred Years after the ratifying and sealing of it up Trumpets are Musical Instruments as I take it yet were they established by the Law in Moses's days That they were so I think is not only apparent from Numb 10. but also from Psal 81.3 4. Blow up the Trumpet in the New moon in the time appointed on our Solemn Feast-day for this was a statute for Israel and a Law of the God of Jacob. This was a Law of God it is said Hereupon I would ask our Author if I were near him Whether this command was a part of the Ceremonial of the Moral or Judicial Law If a part of the Ceremonial Law then was Instrumental Musick enjoyned by that Law But he will not allow of this Well then was it a part of the Judicial Law Then would it have appertained only to the Civil Government which it did not But was it then a part of the Moral Law If so then the use of Instrumental Musick in the Worship of God is a Moral Duty and so not barely Lawful But the Law commanding the use of Instrumental Musick in the Worship of God was not a Judicial or Moral precept and therefore it must have been a Ceremonial one Ser. p. 33. But in the Margin of his Sermon he excepts Trumpets himself and allows them to have been appointed by Moses's Law But then he adds They were appointed for the calling of Assemblies c. I suppose by that c. he intends that there was some other use of them beside calling the Assemblies The Priests the Sons of Aaron the High-Priest were to blow the Trumpets 1. At the removal of the Camp Numb 10.2 6. Make thee Two Trumpets of Silver that thou maiest use them for the journeying of the Camps 2. At the Solemnity of Feasts to call and Assemble the People together Numb 10.2 Make use of them for the calling the Assembly 3. At the Denuntiation of War Numb 10.9 If you go to War in your Land against the Enemy that oppresseth you then ye shall blow an Alarm with the Trumpets But this was not all the use of them For 4 They were to blow the Trumpets at the Oblation of Sacrifices Numb 10.10 Also in the day of your gladness and in your solemn days and in the beginnings of your Months ye shall blow with your Trumpets over your Burnt-offerings and over the Sacrifices of your Peace-offerings that they may be to you for a memorial before your God Here we find that Trumpets were used in the Worship of God I might add 5. They were also blown at times of present or imminent Calamity for Solemn Humiliation Joel 2.15 Hence the Learned * Notes on Num. 10.9 Bishop of Bath and Wells speaking of these Trumpets saith It is to be considered that they were obliged by the blowing of the Trumpets to be awakened to a sense of their Sin and the need of Gods Mercy Isa 58.1 So that the Trumpets were of a Sacred Use And seeing they were appointed by Moses's Law for such an use we may conclude that Trumpets and so Musical Instruments were part of the Ceremonial Law Therefore it seems strange to me that our Author should assert Ser. p. 33. That Instruments of Musick were not appointed in Divine Service in Moses 's time What! Was not the Oblation of Sacrifices Divine Service And were not the Trumpets to be sounded in that Service But adds he It is plain that they were an Institution of David in his most flourishing state True indeed by order from God David added more Musical Instruments to those which had been formerly used But Instrumental Musick in Divine Worship was not first Instituted in his time As has been proved already and may be farther shewen e're I conclude But to improve this he thus argues It appearing to be of David 's Institution could not be a part of the Ceremonial Law I deny that Assertion For altho' Instrumental Musick was by order from God Appointed by David yet might it be part of the Ceremonial Law And here again I would demand to know if Instrumental Musick was commanded in the Service of God by a Law by what Law it was enjoyned Not by the Moral nor Judicial Laws therefore by the Ceremonial And therefore still to use our Authors Phrase It was a part of the Ceremonial Law But how does he prove that Instrumental Musick could not be a part of the Ceremonial Law because of David's Institution Why thus Because the Ceremonial Law was compleated before by Moses in those words Deut. 12.32 What thing soever I command you observe to do it thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it But 1. That the Ceremonial Law was compleated before by Moses so as that there was no addition afterwards made to it is I conceive a mistake For the number of Trumpets according to the first Institution of Moses was but two for the two Sons of Aaron Eleazer and Ithamar the Priests Numb 10.2 Make thee two Trumpets of Silver But in Solomons time the Number of them was greatly Augmented For we read of a Hundred and Twenty Priests who sounded with Trumpets at the Dedication of the Temple 2 Chron. 5.12 Also the Levites which were the Singers being arayed in white Linnen having Cymbals and Psalteries and Harps and with them one hundred and Twenty Priests sounding with Trumpets Again Moses appointed but one Table for the Shew-bread to be set upon Exod. 25.23 Thou shalt also make a Table of Shittim-wood c. And but one Candlestick of Pure Gold Exod. 25.31 And thou shalt make a Candlestick of pure Gold c. But one Laver Exod. 30.18 Thou shalt also make a Laver of Brass But then in Solomons time there were many of these

and if possible removing the Prejudices which the Adversaries of Church-Musick have against this practise It is highly requisite indeed that this be done or otherwise his Organ still will be upon a tottering Foundation He concludes That if this be not done in vain will the Arguments prove which set forth the Use and Advantages of this Institution He presumes he shall easily Answer the Objections which are brought against his New-Musick or Institution as he stiles it By the way a strange Institution which is neither appointed by Gods Law nor Mans in this Nation But for ought I know this Gentlemans Confidence may be somewhat taller than his Performance I shall present you with the Objections and consider the Reply he makes to them Object I. It is commonly said by those of a differing Perswasion in this matter from our Author Ser. p. 31 32. That Instrumental Musick is a Jewish Ceremony and an Appointment of the Law but was to be abolished in the Christian Church That altho' it might suit well enough with that Infant-state yet now by the coming of Christ it is to be done away as the other Ceremonies of the Law are But this is an Argument of no force with him And the Geneva Annotations must have the Epithite of Pernicious given them because they thus object against his Organ A few words to this 1. Some Men I observe have a particular Pique against any thing of Geneva the very word seems to be grating and unpleasant to them Sometimes in their very Prayers they will beg to be secured from the Plots of Rome and Geneva I wonder what mischief Geneva has done them For my part I cannot spell out the meaning of this inveterate Antipathy to that City I am informed that Geneva has a great deal of Charity for the Church of England for in its Prayers it has one Petition for the welfare of the British Church So that Geneva has Charity for these Gentlemen altho' they have none for her 2. But why is this Gentleman so wroth with the Geneva Annotations It is great pitty saith he that they should he Printed with the Bible Why what is the matter O they are contrary to the sense and meaning of the Bible in many places Are they so But I suppose our Author must be judge of that and then it is impossible they should escape a Censure But it may be our Author himself may be mistaken about the sense of many Texts of Scripture But supposing it for once to be true that the Geneva Annotations are contrary to the meaning of the Bible in many places is this Argument enough for the stiffing them that they may never be Printed more At the same rate I think the greatest part of the Annotations or Comments on the Bible ought to be supprest For how few are there but do mistake the sense and meaning of the Bible in many places Some will not except the Learned Dr. Hammond's nor Mr. Pool's with the Continuators nor those of the great Grotius And yet is it pity these should be Printed Should all the Annotations upon the Bible be supprest which have some things in them contrary to the sense and meaning of it I fear we should have but very few left 3. Methinks this Gentleman should have considered that these Annotations were first Published many Years ago when the Annotators had not such excellent Helps for the writing Annotations upon the Bible as we enjoy in the present Age. This methinks should somewhat have checked the sharpness of his Stile against these Annotators But alas He is utterly fallen out with Geneva tho' I believe he knows not why Non amo te Sabadi nec possum dicere quare Hoc tantùm possum dicere non amo te He is mightily prejudiced against Geneva and is resolved upon all occasions to m●ke discoveries of his displeasure 4. But how much soever this Gentleman is pleased to condemn these Annotations yet many Persons who have made a far greater Figure in the Church of England have commended them and appeared in their defence And here I cannot but take notice of what is said of them in the Preface to the Assemblies Annotations The Geneva Bible with the Notes was presented with a special Dedication to the Incomperable Princess Queen Elizabeth which was received with such acceptation of her Majesty and general liking of her People that from that time until the Edition of the last Translation of the Bible it was Printed by Hers and her Rightful and Royal Successors Printers above thirty times over Tho' it was their mishap without any merit to be noted with a black-coal as guilty of mis-interpretation touching the Divinity of Christ and his Messiah-ship and as Simbolizing with Arians and Jews against them both and this was publickly charged upon them by an Academical Doctor * Dr. H. in a Solemn Assembly of the University of Oxford But of this Crime they were more than absolved by Sir Thomas Bodly the famous Founder and Furnisher of the Publick Library his Letter written in their Defence and Praise which was read by the Doctor of the Chair in St. Marys Pulpit and by his and the Orthodox Governours of the University Silencing the Doctor for his Un-orthodox and Scandalous Sermons whereby the Church and State were involved in a high and heinous degree of guilt if the Notes were so unsound as he had suggested for allowing them to be Passable and Publick by so many Impressions I presume our Author never dreamt of this Passage But I wish he would consider it for the future But to come to the Objection its self Say the Annotators Instrumental Musick was a part of the Ceremonial Law and was well enough suited to that Infant state Well What saith our Gentleman to this He utterly dislikes it But do not many of the Primitive Fathers say the same Do not Clemens Alexandrinus St Chrysostome Isidore Pelusiota Theodoret and the Author Quest Respon ad Orthodoxos speak to the same purpose Consult the collected Passages I have given you above So that the Geneva Annotators can pretend to better Antiquity for what they say than our Author can produce The Primitive Fathers speak plain in our Case when as they have not a favourable Sentence to befriend our Authors Organ Where therefore now is the mighty boast of Antiquity But what will this Gentleman say if it should be proved to him That the Church of England in her Homilies so far agrees with Geneva here as to account the use of Organs in Christian Churches to be Unlawful This for ought I know may a little sweeten him Yet this I hope clearly to prove e're I conclude But let us see how our Author will confute this Objection well he hath two things to say to it 1. That the Institution of Musical Instruments in the Service of God was never a part of the Ceremonial Law and therefore the use of it was not to be done away at the coming of Christ And this he will prove Nay if he will prove it I fear he will prove more than he designs He will prove it not only lawful but a Duty still