one was the Practice of the Church as such in those Days and not the other But seeing he refers to speak more fully of this Subject in his last Chapter we shall wave the further Prosecution till he comes thither Only because he says Whatsoever was practised in the Church of God and approved by him before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never afterward declared to be Typical is a Moral Duty I would desire him to tell me where the Praising of God with Musical Instruments used Exod. 15.20 by Miriam and the Women was ever afterwards declared to be Typical Every Type he knows must have it's Antitype and that not such an Idea as we give an Existence to in our own Imaginations but it ought to stand clear upon Record in the Holy Scriptures as in the Case of Circumcision the Paschal Lamb Brazen Serpent Tabernacle Temple Mercy-Seat Levitical Priesthood Altar and Sacrifices or else it is no Type properly Now if the Praising of God by Musical Instruments hath no Antitype declared in the Scriptures as it hath not then it is not Typical but according to his Conclusion it must be Moral and if so then 't is a Duty of equal Obligation with his Vocal Singing and the Omission of it a Sin of Ignorance or Voluntary Neglect This Inference tho' it be the plain Consequence of his Assertion yet I disclaim all Interest in it so as to be any Part of my Opinion In this Assertion he intimates That there are no Duties of a Middle Nature between Moral and Typical but I think there are some Duties incumbent upon us which are not at all Typical and yet somewhat more than meerly Moral He says Moral Duties of Religion were originally written in the Heart of Man by Nature These now are Duties of Religion To love our Enemies to bless them that curse us to do good to them that hate us and pray for them which despitefully use us and persecute us Mat. 5.44 and have nothing at all Typical in them neither are they meerly Moral for no Man findeth them in his Heart by Nature But they are such Duties which have undoubtedly something in them that soars above the Sphere of meer Morality To give him another Instance the Special Graces of the Holy Spirit as Faith Hope and Charity called also Duties tho' they contain Morality in them and are conversant about it yet are they not meerly Moral according to R. A's Sense of the Word or Typical but wholly of Super-natural Extraction Again Because He is so positive that no Exception can be made against this Assertion viz. That whatsoever was practis'd in the Church of God approved of him before the Giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never afterward declared to be Typical is a Moral Duty I demand what he thinks about the Admission of Infants into Church-Membership for that was practis'd in the Church of God and approved by him before the Giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never afterward declared that I read of to be Typical If his Position be unexceptionably true then 't will follow that the Admission of Infants into Church-Memâ—â—rship was a Moral Duty and if so then it ought 〈◊〉 be practic'd now and consequentâ—â— both he and the five * Jos Maisters William Collins Joseph Stennett John Piggott Tho. Harrison Brethren who subscribed two Commendatory â—â—â—faces One to his Essay and Anoâ—â—er to his Vindication and Appendix â—â—ve given away the Cause of Anâ—adobaptism which hath been and is so strenuâ—â—sly contended for and put an Unanswerable Arâ—â—ment into the Hands of those who argue for the â—â—ght of Infants to Water-baptism and Visible â—hurch-Membership in Gospel-days And here I cannot but think it both necessary and â—â—asonable to remark briefly upon â—â—â—s Notion of the †Essay p. 8 14 40. Vniversal â—â—d Immutable Obligation of a Moâ—â— Duty without making any Exception 'till he â—â—mes to page 106. where he tells us of the Old â—â—stinction between the Obligation of Affirmative â—â—d Negative Precepts of the Moral Law In that 〈◊〉 latter not only bind always but also to all times â—â—â—reas the Former tho' they bind always yet not to 〈◊〉 Times But if God can alter the Law of Nature and disanul the Obligation by taking away the Matter of the Law or the Necessity or the Reasonableness or the Obligation and all this he can do â—â—th ‖ Duct Dubit l. 2. c. 1. r. 1. n. 49. p. 181. Jer. Taylor one Way â—or other then the Duty aâ—â—ng from the Law can oblige 〈◊〉 longer than the Law it self obligeth For the â—â—w of Nature hath in several Instances respect to â—â—rticular States and so becomes in those Instances changeable as the States themselves Whereupon the * Casuist before cited Ibid. â—â—ndemns Grotius of an Unwary Expresâ—â—â— in saying that God cannot change the Law of Nature For as Paul said of the Priesthood being chang'd there must of necessity be a change of the Law So it is in the Law of Nature Matter of it being chang'd there must of Neceâ—ty also be a Change of the Law This may seem New and indeed is Unusâ— in the manner of speaking but the Case is Eâ—dent and Empirically certain For when â— commanded Abraham to kill his Son the Israeâ— to rob the Egyptians and to run away with thâ— Goods he gave them a Command to break Instance of the Natural Law and he made necessary that Cain should marry with his Sistâ— and all those Laws of Nature which did sâ—pose Liberty and Indistinction of Possessions â— wholly altered when Dominion and Servituâ— and Propriety came into the World Tayâ— Ibid. n. 48. Of the same Mind is Thoâ— Aquinas who * Sum. Theol. 12 ae q. 94. Art 5. saith Tâ— Law of Nature may be châ—ged two Ways 1. By Adding something to it profitable Humane Life which it did not primarily â—quire 2. By Substracting from it in some particular â—stances whereby the Obligation ceaseth as to thâ— Instances for certain special Reasons impedâ— the Observation Sect. 9. His Fourth Consideration whereby endeavours to prove Singing the Praises of â— a Moral Duty is Whatsoever is enjoyned upon all Men of Nations is a Moral Duty Essay p. 11. Answ This Position being laid down withâ— any Limitation or Exception I deny for thâ— two Reasons 1. Because there are some Duties of Universal â—unction upon Mankind which I have * Chap. 1. Sect. 8. p. 32. shewn before are of a â—ddle Nature between Moral â—d Typical One Instance is about Loving our â—mies Blessing them that curse us c. which are Typical for they have no Antitype nor meer-Positive for they are Intrinsically good Nor â—â—ly meerly Moral for tho' they contain that â—ch is Moral in them yet they are not written Mens Hearts by Nature for Depraved Nature â—holly bent the contrary way Men naturally â—cluding it highly reasonable To repel Force by â—ce and to take Revenge upon their
have no intrinsick Goodness in them but derive all their Vertue and Obligation from God's positive Command and Legislature yet I cannot receive his Notion about Moral Duties of Religion Namely That they were originally written in the Heart of Man by Nature and may still in a great measure be discerned by serious Attention and Consideration without any special Revelation Essay p. 7. To discover the Unsoundness of this Assertion Man may be consider'd both in his Innocential and Lapsed Estate and so Nature it self according to this twofold State of Man admits of a double Signification In Man's Estate of Innocence it could not possibly be Nature as the word is commonly taken but the God of Nature who originally wrote the Moral Duties of Religion in the Heart of Man And God said let us make Man in our Image after our Likeness So God created Man in his own Image in the Image of God created he him Gen. 1.26 27. And the Apostle shews wherein this consisted Namely In Knowledge Righteousness and Holiness Col. 3.10 Eph. 4.24 From the comparing of which Scriptures it plainly appears 't was God himself and not Nature that insculp'd them upon the Heart of Man Again Nature in the Fall is totally depraved as well as Man and therefore stands in equal need of Redemption And this being the Case how can that which is universally corrupted exert an Operation peculiar to a most Pure and Holy Principle as is the writing of Moral Duties of Religion upon the Heart of Man I know 't is a received Opinion with many that the Light of Nature doth discover those Moral Duties unto Men which are incumbent on them as Creatures But if they are ask'd what they mean by the Light of Nature we find them divided in their Answers Some tell us it is Natural Conscience but that springing from the Natural Powers of the Reasonable Soul which is defiled in the Fall cannot do the Work assigned it Others say 't is a Relick of that Light which Man lost by his Fall or a Remainder of the Law written in the Heart of Man in his first Creation which is not saith Zanchius wholly * Partim expuncta partim obliterata Zanc. Tom. 4. l. 1. cap. 10. p. 190. erased by the Fall But how can this be seeing †Omnes homines per inobedientiam Adae injusti effecti totique quanti sunt animo corpore corrupti c. Tom. 6. Com. in Eph. p. 82. he and ‖ Baptist's Confes of Faith Chap. 6. Sect. 2 4. Westminster Confes Chap. ibid. others acknowledge that Man by the Fall is dead in Sin and wholly defiled in all the Faculties and Parts of Soul and Body Is utterly indisposed disabled and made opposite to all Good and wholly enclined to all Evil. If Man lost all Spiritual Life Light and Power by the Fall then 't is impossible in that Estate he should have any such Relick or Remainder left in him for the discovery of his Duty to God Against this it is Objected That the Gentiles were not only directed but also enabled by the Light of Nature to do the Duties of the Moral Law For when the Gentiles which have not the Law do by Nature the things contained in the Law these having not the Law are a Law unto themselves Rom. 2.14 The Answer hereunto is obvious if it be considered what Nature the Apostle intends in this place if that Divine and Spiritual Nature which is derived from the Lord Jesus Christ then the Objection vanisheth but if that Corrupt and Depraved Nature we derive from Old Adam then 't is utterly impossible that any by that Nature should do the things contained in the Law whose Commands are Holy Just and Good And therefore Estius and Toletus in Pool's Synopsis Criticorum do understand by Nature that which is per Gratiam reparata repaired or restored by Grace From whence 't is evident whether we consider Man before or after the Fall neither the Law of God it self nor Moral Duties of Religion arising therefrom were written originally in the Heart of Man by Nature but by the God of Nature alone to whom the Inscription is peculiar as being not only a Special Branch of his Royal Prerogative but also of his Gracious Promise to his People I will put my Law in their inward Parts and write it in their Hearts Jer. 31.33 Sect. 2. The Term Moral which R. A. much insists upon being ambiguous would require some Explication but that by applying of it here to the Worship of God and opposing it to meer Positive and Instituted Duties he hath given us his Sense of its signification Only let the Reader take Notice that he seems to comprehend the whole of Religious Duties under these two Heads Moral and Positive and in saying those of the first sort may still in a great measure be discern'd by serious Attention and Consideration without any special Revelation To me he plainly intimates we are not much obliged to Divine Revelation for any thing save those of the second sort viz. meer Positive Duties such as Baptism and the Lords-Supper which have no real intrinsick Value in them but receive as he says all their Force whereby we are obliged to observe them from the Declaration of God's Will and Pleasure by his Word The serious Attention and Consideration he speaks of are surely too dim a Light of themselves to make the great discoveries he ascribes to them For he doth not speak of some particular Duties only that are discernable thereby but Moral Duties Indefinitely and those not darkly neither but in a great Measure and such as do oblige a Christian Now tho' it should be supposed but not granted that some such discoveries may be made as he mentions by serious Attention and Consideration without any special Revelation I would then fain know of him how the Stoicks Platonists and Peripateticks Men destitute I suppose in his Opinion of special Revelation and yet many of them very serious for Attention and Consideration came to be so divided De naturâ summi Boni about the Nature of the chiefest Good some placing it in the Habit others in the Action of Vertue and some in the Union of the Soul with God Whence it came to pass that those great Contemplative Moralists did spend so much of their time in Disputes about the Nature of Vertue in general the Offices of it and the measures of Practice conform thereunto If Attention and Consideration would have directed them in those Enquiries 't is strange how such Studious and Speculative Men should be at so great an Uncertainty about them Again If special Revelation be not necessary to guide Men in their Disquisitions about the Moral Duties of Religion but serious Attention and Consideration exclusive of such Revelation will still in a great Measure direct them I demand the Reason of that universal Ignorance which possesses the Minds of the Wisest Men of all Nations who have
or Instituted by him â—fore the Promulgation of the Decalogue and â—ver afterward declared to be Typical is a â—oral Duty or else this Assertion may be justly â—cepted against For all Uncommanded Worship â— forbidden and therefore Unlawful Worship â—either can any thing be properly a Moral Duty â— be performed in the Church of God as a Part â— his Worship which hath not the Stamp of Diâ—ne Authority upon it For the Agreeableness of Practice to that which is called Right Reaâ—â—n or the Light of Nature is no sufficient Ground â— a Church Observation except it be also comâ—nded by God I do not in the least Question but â—â— the True Church of God in all Ages was guidâ—â— by his Holy Spirit in the Worship they perâ—â—â—med and he accepted or else I know not how â—â—y could be the True Church or perform acâ—â—ptable Service to him For the True Church hath â—â—d Christ all along for it's Head of Government and Influence to suppose it at any Time to be witâ— out him for it's Legislator and Guide were to maâ—â— it cease it 's very Being For the Being of the Trâ—â— Church consists in it's Union with and special Râ—lation to Christ as it's Head And for the Servicâ— which it performs to God they must be of his Prâ—paring and not the Issues of our own Privaâ—â— Studies and Contrivances Fâ—â— * Reynold's on Hos 14.1 2. nothing can go to God i. â— meet with Acceptance at hâ—â— Hands but what first comâ— from him From whence it doth apparently follow thâ— whatsoever was practised in the True Church of Goâ— and approved by him as a Part of his Worship eveâ— before the Giving the Sinai Law had his Commanâ— for it because it could not otherwise be acceptabâ—â— Worship to him For he accepts of none but whaâ— he has Appointed To this it may perhaps be Objected that befoâ—â— the Giving of the Law at Mount Sinai there waâ— no written Law and so no Command for thâ— Churches Direction in Worship But Moral Dâ—ties of Religion were written in Mens Hearts bâ— Nature and by serious Attention thereunto the could discern what they were without any speciâ—â— Revelation and so perform true and acceptabâ—â— Worship to Almighty God Answ This Objection is in part answered alreadâ— where I have shewn that Moral Duties of Religioâ— are not written in Mens Hearts by Nature bâ—â— by the God of Nature and that serious Attentioâ— alone is Morally Impossible to make the great Diâ—coveries which are attributed to it for Manâ— Natural Condition in the Faâ—â— being as the Holy Scriptures dâ—clare †Acts 26.18 Eph. 5.8 Col. 1.13 1 Thes 5.5 Darkness how is â— possible for him to see his Mâ—ral Duty to God and to perform it with Acceptance without special Revelation for he must needs fail who hath not this Unerring Guide to direct him And tho' there was no written Law before the giving of that at Sinai and so no written Precept for Direction in Church-Worship yet this Defect was supplied by Divine Revelation * Ushers's Body of Divinity p. 6. In the beginning of the World saith one God delivered his Word by Revelation And a little after †Ibid. p. 7. From the Creation until the time of Moses for the space of 2513. years God immediately by his Voice and Prophets sent from him taught the Church his Truth Heb. 1.1 ‖ Taylor 's Ductor Dubit l. 2. c. 1. r. 1. n. 44. p. 180. Another hath this excellent Saying Christ is called by Peter and the Greek Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word of the Father and the Law and it is remarkable this Word or Law of the Father was the Instrument of teaching Mankind in all Periods of the World And * See Baxter's More Reasons for the Christian Religion p. 94 95. a Third makes no doubt but the Eternal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word that had undertaken Mans Redemption and thereupon was our Lord Redeemer gave even to Socrates Plato Cicero Seneca Antonine Epictetus Plutarch c. what Light and Mercy they had tho' they understood not well from whom or upon what Grounds they had them Sect. 6. Many Learned Men do tell us of the Seven Precepts which pass'd from one to another by Oral Tradition Six whereof were first given to the Sons of Adam and the Seventh super-added to the Sons of Noah and altogether by the Rabbins stiled the Seven Precepts of the Sons of Noah which the Church of God had before the Sinaical Promulgation and the same in Substance with the Decalogue They are set down in this Order by a great †Hammond's Annot. on Act. 15. d. Critick 1. The First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Strange Worship or of renouncing the Idolatry of the Heathens the not Worshipping other Gods 2. The Second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Benediction that is the Worship of the Name that is the true God 3. The Third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Judgment or Administration of Justice 4. The Fourth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of disclosing Nakedness that is of Abstaining from all Vncleanness and interdicted Marriages within those Degrees which are set down Lev. 18. 5. The Fifth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of shedding of Blood or against Homicides 6. The Sixth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Theft or Rapine and doing as they would be done to by others 7. The Seventh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Member of any living Creature or that they should not cat the Flesh of any Creature with the Blood in it See also Synopsis Critic in Act. 15.20 Schindler in Pentaglot p. 1530. Curcell Rel. Christ Institut lib. 4. c. 11. Sect. 3. Tho' this Discourse may seem a Digression to those who conceive the Church of God was chiefly directed in Matters of Worship by meer Rational Principles before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai yet to others who Believe Divine Revelation was her only Guide it will appear very necessary for the clearing of the Truth to all such as are imposed upon by the Asserters of Natural Worship as tho' that as such were Acceptable to God Unless therefore R. A. be understood according to the Explication before given I think there is sufficient Reason to except against his Consideration which he proceeds to prove thus That singing the Praises of God was thus practised viz. In the Church of God and approved by him before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai and never afterward declared Typical is evident Exod. 15.1 Then sang Moses and the Children of Israel this Song to the Lord Essay p. 10. Sect. 7. Answ If this Text doth not prove Conjoint Singing with Plurality of External Voices which is the Point he contends for he hath then lost one main Proof of the Morality of it and that this Instance doth not prove it the following Considerations I hope will evince First It is altogether improbable that Moses and the Children of Israel all Sang Vocally