Chapter 5

Before we proceed to any further reasons of the point, let us first (by the help of Christ) clear the objections against this. The objections are many, and some of them seem more weighty, and some more light: let us impartially and evenly (by the Lord's guidance) weigh them all in the balance of the Sanctuary.

Object. 1. If Paul had meant David's Psalms, or Scripture-songs, it had been an easy matter to have named David's Psalms, or Scripture-songs, as David himself named his songs, the Psalms or Songs of David, when he delivered them to the chief Musician, and to his company to be sung.

Answ. 1. It may as justly be said, if Paul had meant to exclude David's Psalms, or Scripture-songs, it had been as easy to have excluded them by name, and to have limited them only to such Psalms and Songs, as the Spirit should suggest to their hearts.

Answ. 2. The Apostle expressly names Psalms, and Hymns, and spiritual Songs, and they three are the very express titles of the Psalms in the Psalm-Book. Now why he should direct them to the very titles of David's Psalms and yet not mean the Psalms, that bear those titles, can a good conscience give a good reason for it?

Answ. 2. When David gave his Psalms and Songs to the Musicians in Israel, it was meet he should set his name to them, or by some other mark make it appear, that the Psalms were inspired and delivered by a Prophet of God. But after the Book of Psalms was generally known and received to be of divine inspiration, (as other Oracles of God) the Psalms are as usually alleged in the New Testament, without the name of David, as with it (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:33).

Object. 2. The Psalms here committed to the spiritual Singers to be sung, are the words of Christ, which are to dwell richly in us (Colossians 3:16). But the Psalms dedicated to the sons of Korah, were the words of David and Asaph. And so the Holy Ghost calls them. Not but that the words spoken by the mouth of David and Asaph, were the words of Christ, but that the words which are to be the spiritual songs of the Saints, wherein they are to teach one another, and to sing to God, they are words spoken to the heart, by the voice of the Spirit of Christ. Besides, the word of Christ, is properly the Gospel, by way of eminency, in way of opposition to the Law, given by Moses.

Answ. 1. The words of David and Asaph, as they were the words of Christ in the mouth of David and Asaph: so they were the words of Christ also in the mouths of the sons of Korah, or any other Singers in the Temple. If any of them did not sing them with the Spirit of Christ as well as David and Asaph spoke, and penned them by the Spirit of Christ, it was a sinful defect in them, but not in the word itself; nor in the godly Singers of the Temple, (such as Heman, and Jeduthun, and others) who were spiritual, and holy men, and sang them with melody in their hearts, as well as in their voices. And it will be alike sinful defect in the New Testament, in such as sing the Psalms of David, to sing them without some measure of the Spirit of David. For the Apostle expressly requires, that we should sing with grace in our hearts. But if the words of David and Asaph, be the words of Christ, and be sung of the Church, with grace in the heart, we demand whether this act of the Church be not an act of faith, and of the obedience of faith to the word of Christ, in that text of the Apostle?

Answ. 2. It is an unsafe and unsavory expression, to speak of the words of David and Asaph, as if they were only the words of Christ in the mouths of spiritual Singers. For if they were not the words of Christ in the mouths of carnal Singers also, then the holy Scriptures were not the word of Christ, if they be read by a carnal reader. So the unbelief of man shall make the faith of God of none effect; yes, the word of God, not to be the word of God.

Answ. 3. Let it be considered in the fear of God, whether the words of David and Asaph, sung with grace in the heart to God, be not as truly and properly (in the Apostle's sense) the word of Christ, as any Song indited by the private gift of any Saint of God now living? If so, then the Apostle encourages us to sing the Psalms of David and Asaph with their Spirit. If not, then there be Christians now, that are carried by a more infallible Spirit, than the Prophets were in old time. And yet Paul speaks of the Saints now, as led by the Spirit of God (Romans 8:14). But Peter speaks of the Prophets then, as carried by the Holy Ghost (2 Peter 1:21), which puts this difference, that such as are led by the Spirit may err; but such as are carried by the Spirit, are carried and lifted above themselves by the Holy Ghost, and cannot err: and so was David and Asaph.

4. Though the words of Christ be the Gospel, yet the words of David are not to be shut out of the Gospel; for the Gospel was preached to Israel, when David and the other Prophets were preached, yes, and some parts of Moses also (Hebrews 4:2; John 5:46).

Object. 3. But if the Apostle had intended to commend to the Churches the singing of the Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs of David and Asaph, what need was there for him to exhort either the Ephesians to be filled with the Spirit, or the Colossians, to have the word of Christ dwell richly in them, for such a service? For any small measure of the Spirit, and of the Word, will suffice to sing the Psalms of David and Asaph, in their words, and in the meter and tunes accustomed. But to invent new spiritual Songs, fit to teach and admonish the Church, would require a full measure of the Spirit, and a rich treasure of the word to dwell in us. And therefore Paul bids the Ephesians, to be filled with the Spirit, in singing the spiritual songs of the New Testament, as drunkards are filled with wine, and in the strength and spirits of their wine, invent and sing their wanton Sonnets.

Answ. 1. Paul did exhort them to be filled with the Spirit, as drunkards be with wine, not that they might invent, and sing spiritual songs, as drunkards do wanton sonnets; for neither do drunkards filled with wine, usually invent sonnets, but sing such as they learned before, when they were sober; nor does the Apostle speak of inventing songs at all, either wanton songs by drunkards, or spiritual songs by the faithful; but only to be filled with the Spirit, as drunkards be with wine, that so they might avoid the riotous and excessive mirth of drunkards, and employ and improve their holy mirth and joy, to the singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, for their own mutual edification and consolation, and for holy thanksgiving and praise to the Lord.

Answ. 2. Though it does not require such a full measure of the Spirit, nor rich portion of the Word dwelling in us, to sing a psalm invented and penned to our hands: yet a full and rich measure of the Word and Spirit will be needful to perform all those duties, which the Apostle in those texts calls for. For the Apostle calls to the improvement, as of the whole word of Christ to the teaching and admonishing of one another, so of the Psalms, not only to those two heads, but also besides those, to a further third end, to wit, to the singing of them to God's praise. Now to be able to improve the whole word of God to these two spiritual ends, and the Psalms to all those three spiritual ends does require a full and rich measure both of Spirit and Word to dwell in us.

Answ. 3. It will require a full and rich measure both of Word and Spirit to dwell in us, to direct and appoint a fit psalm, (out of the Book of Psalms) suitable to the present occasions of singing to God's praise, and to the instruction and admonition of the Church, according to the present estate of their affections, or afflictions, their consolation, or conversation in hand.

Answ. 4. It will require a fuller and richer measure of the Word and Spirit to dwell in us, than a carnal heart would imagine even to utter a song with such grace in the heart, as might make melody to the Lord. It requires a good measure of the indwelling Spirit, and word of God to pray in the Spirit; but much more to sing in the Spirit, wherein our senses delighted with the melody are apt to steal away our hearts from spiritual fervency. Deborah found her heart dull to be awakened, so much as to utter the song, which she had prepared by the Spirit for her and Barak to sing together (Judges 5:12). Awake, Awake, (says she) Awake, Awake Deborah, utter a song, that fourfold ingemination, Awake, Awake, Awake, Awake, utter a song, argues in the best of God's servants, a deep drowsiness of spirit, when we should come to utter a spiritual song spiritually: like as that fourfold ingemination to the Church of Jerusalem, to Return, Return, Return, Return (Canticles 6:13) argues a deep and strong averseness of the Spirit of the Jews to conversion, and returning to the Lord.

Object. 4. The Apostle calls the whole word of Christ dwelling in us, Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs, neither does he limit us to one Prophet more than to another, unless you will say, that the words of Christ in the Gospel, or which was prophesied by the rest of the Prophets, were not spiritual songs; but the Apostle calls them all Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs, as well as David's, if they dwell in the heart. For the words of Christ there, (to wit, in the heart) are songs for the Spirit, or else they are no songs to any man. Therefore as yet, to sing the prophecies of David after our common manner, is no worship commanded or taught us in holy Writ.

Answ. 1. It is a groundless assertion to say, that Paul calls the whole word of God dwelling in us, Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs. For why then should the Holy Ghost give that style and title of Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs only to the Book of Psalms, and to none else of all of the books of the Prophets or Apostles. Again, if Paul called the words of all the Prophets, Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs, why then did not the Prophets in their own language pen them with musical accents, as well as the Psalms of David and Asaph?

Besides, if the words of all the Prophets were spiritual songs, why then did the Prophets themselves find the books of their own prophecies bitter in their bellies (Revelation 10:10)? There be many words of the Prophets, that are more fit matter for humiliation and mourning before the Lord, than fit to be sung as spiritual songs to the Lord. But suppose there be many words of Christ, and of his Prophets, that are fit matter for spiritual rejoicing (as indeed all the doctrines and promises of grace be) yet what warrant have we to sing them, as in some cathedral churches and colleges, the Bible-clerks do sing their chapters out of the Old and New Testament?

Answ. 2. Whether the words of Christ in the Gospel, or in the Prophets, be spiritual songs or no, yet if the Psalms of David be also the words of Christ, if they likewise dwell in our hearts, and if they be spiritual songs too, then it will unavoidably follow, that the same word of the Apostle that commands us to sing Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs, commands us also to sing the Psalms of David and Asaph to the Lord, unless you will say that the Psalms of David and Asaph, (though dwelling in the heart,) are neither Psalms, nor Hymns, nor spiritual Songs, however the Holy Ghost entitles them by such names. How then can you say, that to sing the prophecies of David, does not yet appear to be a worship of God commanded or taught in holy Writ? As for our common manner of singing of them, we shall have occasion to speak to that hereafter.

Object. 5. David's Psalms considered, not as Scriptures divinely inspired, but as spiritual songs seem to be appropriated to the Temple-worship. 1. Because they are appointed to be sung by proper officers and musical instruments, belonging to the Temple, as appears by the titles of several Psalms. 2. Because neither Christ, nor the Apostles in their writings used them at all, otherwise than as the other writings of Moses, and the Prophets, for instruction and illustration, teaching us how to use the same. Those Psalms therefore as songs, being proper to that service of the Temple, are abolished with the Temple worship.

Both these reasons are too slender to confine David's Psalms to Temple-worship. For 1. though some of David's Psalms were appointed to be sung by the officers and musical instruments of the Temple, yet not above one part of three, considering the length of the 119th Psalm. There be an hundred and fifty Psalms in all, and of all these not above 57 are appointed to be sung by the officers and instruments of the Temple: and Psalm 119 is none of them; so that two parts of three are free from any express reference to the Temple.

2. The matter of some Psalms does evidently argue, they were not appointed to be sung always in the Temple; or at least did agree more properly to other times than those, wherein the Temple stood. The 74th Psalm (which was a Psalm of Asaph, but joined with the Psalms of David) complained that the enemies had sent God's Sanctuary into the fire, (as the Hebrew words be) and had defiled by casting down the dwelling place of her Name to the ground (ver. 7). The 44th Psalm, though it was committed to the sons of Corah, yet surely it was chiefly intended (as Paul applies part of it) to the times of the New Testament; for I suppose it could never be verified of any times of the Jewish Temple, (first, or second) that ever God gave up the people of Israel as sheep for meat, to be killed all the day, to be appointed for the slaughter, to be sore broken in the place of dragons, and covered with the shadow of death, when as yet though all this evil was come upon them, they had not forgotten their God, nor dealt falsely in his Covenant; nor their hearts turned back, nor their steps declined from his way (ver. 7 to 23). Paul indeed acknowledges this very word to be accomplished in the saints of the primitive churches in the Apostles' times (Romans 8:36), but where shall we find the like innocency, with the like calamity met together in the children of Israel, while the Temple was standing? And is it credible, the Psalm was confined to be sung in the Temple, where they could not sing it, but with a sad reproof to themselves for their discord in practise, and yet forbidden to be sung in the churches of the New Testament, where (in some ages at least) they might sing it, both with heart, and voice, and practise, all of them keeping holy consent and harmony together?

3. It appears by the titles of such Psalms as are directed to the officers and instruments of the Temple-music, that there was something typical or rudimental in the manner of singing some of the Psalms of David and Asaph in the Temple-worship. But this does no more argue, that the whole service of God in singing David's Psalms was typical or rudimental, than it will argue prayer to be a typical and Temple worship, because prayer in the Temple was offered with incense, and so with the Temple and with the incense to be abolished. He that will make the Psalms of David (as they are songs) to be types of the spiritual songs of the New Testament, and therefore now the singing of them to be abolished, he might as well say (with Mr. Smith) that the letters in the Scriptures of the Old Testament were typical (typing out the Law written in our hearts) and so abolish all reading of the holy Scriptures now in the days of the New Testament.

4. As it has been showed above, that singing of Psalms with lively voice is not a ceremonial but a moral duty, and so continues now in the days of the New Testament; so it may be as truly said, that the singing of David's Psalms, and other Scripture-songs, is in like sort not a ceremonial but a moral duty; and so of like continuance in the New Testament. The Psalms of David, and Asaph, and the rest, are as full of holy and lively, spiritual, and evangelical meditations, and affections, instruments, prayers, and praises, as any that we can expect to be indited by any officer or member of the Christian churches now. Yes, it is to be feared that the Psalms compiled by the devoutest Christians now would fall short of those of David and Asaph, in spirit and life. How then can we make the Psalms of David and Asaph ceremonial types of the spiritual songs of the faithful in the New Testament, when types are wont to be more carnal, and worldly, and literal, and less spiritual and lively, than the antitypes? But here the antitypes are less spiritual and lively than the types.

5. As for that other reason taken from the practise of Christ, and his Apostles, who in their writings never used the Psalms of David for spiritual songs as the writings of Moses and other Prophets for instruction and illustration; this is of as small force as the former.

For 1. writings are not a place or season for the use of spiritual songs. Psalms are to be used for songs in church assemblies, and private soliloquies and conferences, not in writings: and yet so far as Psalms may be used for songs in writing, Paul so used them in his Epistles written to the Ephesians and Colossians, where he instructs both churches, and in them all others to sing these Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs. Among which these Psalms of David and Asaph, if they be not principally intended, yet surely they are plainly included — or else they are neither the word of Christ, nor are they Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs.

2. It is not credible, that Christ never used the Psalms of David and Asaph for spiritual songs. For the use of those Psalms for songs was doubtless a part of God's worship while the Temple stood. And if Christ had neglected any part of that worship which was then in force, how then did himself say, that it became him to fulfill all righteousness (Matthew 3:15)?

Besides, many things Jesus did and said (and so did the Apostles) which are not written in the Gospel nor Acts nor Epistles (John 21:25). And yet this is said, that he with his disciples sung a hymn (Matthew 26:30). And hymns is the general title for the whole book of Psalms; for though it be translated, The Book of Psalms, yet every one that knows that language, knows the word is, The Book of Hymns: so that look, as when in ordinary speech we say, They sung a psalm, we mean one of the psalms of David or Asaph, (unless some other be named) because such are wont to be sung in ordinary use; so when the Evangelists say, Christ and his disciples sung a hymn, the people of God would not easily understand any other but one or more of David's hymns, because such were wont to be the ordinary songs used in the worship of God. And surely if Christ and his disciples had sung any other hymn, than one of these psalms of David and Asaph, which were wont to be sung in their temples and synagogues, the Evangelists who are wont to record far less matters in things which pertain to God's worship, they would not have omitted the substituting of a hymn indited for this special occasion, in stead of the hymns wont to be sung in the end of the Passover.

The like may be said of Paul and Silas, who are recorded (Acts 16:25) to have sung a hymn to God, (for so is the word;) where common understanding would take it for one or more of the hymns of David or Asaph, and not any other new invented spiritual song, unless some hint in the text might carry us from the ordinary meaning and use of the word among the people of God.

Object. 6. We are called upon by David himself to sing new songs (Psalm 96:1) and oft elsewhere, and such as had gifts then used them for inditing and singing new songs, as Asaph, Heman, Ethan, etc. The four beasts (Revelation 5:9) and the 144,000 followers of the Lamb did sing a new song; as did they also, who had gotten victory over the beast (Revelation 15:3-4).

Answer. 1. There is no estate and condition that ever befell the Church and people of God, or can befall them but the Holy Ghost, as he did foresee the same, so he has provided and recorded some scripture-psalm, suitable thereunto. And these psalms being chosen out suitably to the new occasions and new conditions of God's people, and sung by them with new hearts and renewed affections, will ever be found new songs. Words of eternal truth and grace, are ever old (as the Gospel is an eternal Gospel) and ever new; as the commandment of love is a new commandment as well as old. As to the new creature all things are become new (2 Corinthians 5:17-18). Daily mercies are to him new mercies (Lamentations 3:23), etc. Duties of humiliation, which have been of ancient practice in the Church, are to him, as new wine. But to an old and carnal heart, that lies under the state of vanity and corruption of nature, there is nothing new, no new thing under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9).

2. David's exhortation to sing a new song, pertained to them in the Old Testament, as well as to us in the New. And yet they upon new occasions sang the old songs of David, and that with acceptance (2 Chronicles 5:13; 2 Chronicles 20:21; Ezra 3:11).

3. Asaph, Heman, and Ethan, were men endued with an infallible measure of a spirit of prophecy, in inditing those psalms, which the Church of Israel received from them. Give us the like men with the like gifts, and we shall receive and sing their psalms, as the Church of Israel did the other.

4. The places objected out of the Revelation, admit a further answer, though the former might serve; the new song mentioned (Revelation 5:9-10) may either be understood metonymically for a doxology or thanksgiving, which the saints in the Church should give to Christ upon occasion of his revealing a clear exposition of the Revelation; or else, if it be understood literally, that they sang that very song, as it is there penned by the Holy Ghost, then it appears, that at such a time that song shall be translated into number and meter, fit to be sung, and shall be sung by the Church, when they shall see such a clear exposition of the Revelation come to light, as shall provoke them to give glory to Christ, who has received power to open the book, and by the same power has redeemed his people, and called them to be kings and priests to God his Father. And thus, this place only shows, that it will be lawful to sing other songs, besides those of David and Asaph: but yet such only, as are penned by an infallible Spirit; or else upon special occasion, by men of spiritual gifts, which we deny not.

The song of the 144,000 followers of the Lamb, it is not expressly said to be a new song, but as it were a new song (Revelation 14:3). New to them who had been wont to hear the worshippers of the Beast to sing and rejoice in their own merits, and superstitious devotions: and new also in respect of the renewed affections, wherewith they sang it: but yet the same ancient song which the sheep and saints of Christ, were wont to sing, even in David's time, of the righteousness of Christ, even of his only, and of their own blessedness in his not imputing their sins to them. Thus David's psalms in the spiritual use and sense of them are new songs, or as it were new songs, to this day, to all that are renewed by grace, to look for their righteousness in Christ, and not in the works of the law; for which David was wont to sing, no flesh living could be justified by them. And though it be said, that no man could learn that song, but the 144,000 who were redeemed from the earth; yet it is not meant of the words and sentences of the song, but of the spiritual sense and use of the song, which no man indeed can learn, but they that have felt the grace and power of their redemption by the Lord Jesus. As no man knows the new name, but they that have received it (Revelation 2:17).

The Song of those who had gotten victory over the beast (Revelation 15) is said to be the Song of Moses and of the Lamb, ver. 3. And surely the matter of Moses' Song (Exodus 15) might justly yield fit matter for the like doxology (or thanksgiving) upon the like occasion: as the like did fall out in the year 88. Rome being spiritual Egypt (Revelation 11:8), and the Pope with his prelates resembling Pharaoh with his task-masters, and the Spanish Armada marching forth with the like pride and fury, to bring us back to the Egyptian bondage; and the redemption from them all being alike miraculous; upon which miraculous deliverance, not only the matter of Moses' Song, but the very words also were then fitly used, and still may be for a spiritual song of thanksgiving to the Lord, both for that and the like deliverances.

And as for the Song of the Lamb, which those that had victory over the Beast did sing, surely all those Songs of David, which celebrate either his own deliverances from Saul, or the deliverance of the Church from Egypt, or Babylon, or from other enemies, may justly own and bear that title. For when David acknowledges and professes, that in his Songs, the Spirit of the Lord spoke by him, and that his word was in his tongue (2 Samuel 23:2), what Spirit of the Lord was that, but the Spirit of the Lord Jesus? And what are then such Songs, but the Songs of the Lamb, through whose redemption the Church and saints enjoy all their deliverances? And surely, the Song of the Lamb, recorded (in Revelation 15:3, 4) seems evidently to point at sundry Psalms of David, out of which it was compiled and collected, and which therefore were suitable and fit to be sung upon occasion of their victory over the Beast, especially with respect and reference to those special sentences, which were fetched from there, though with some small variation, such as is wont to be found in all the Scriptures of the New Testament, quoted out of the old.

Revelation 15:3. Great and marvellous are your works, Lord God Almighty. Just and true are your ways, you King of Saints. And ver. 4. You only are Holy. Who shall not fear you, O Lord, and glorify your Name? For all nations shall come and worship before you. For your judgments are made manifest. Psalm 86:10. You are great, and do wondrous things, you are God alone. Ver. 8. Among the gods, there is none like to you, nor any works like your works. Psalm 111:2. The works of the Lord are great. Ver. 4. And wonderful. Ver. 7. The works of his hand are truth and judgment. Psalm 71:22. O you Holy One of Israel. Psalm 86:9. All nations whom you have made, shall come and worship before you, O Lord, and glorify your Name. Psalm 9:16. The Lord is known by the judgment which he executes. Psalm 64:9. All men shall fear and shall declare the work of God; for they shall wisely consider of his doings.

Inasmuch therefore as these who got the victory over the Beast, are said to have sung the Song of the Lamb, and this Song of the Lamb is expressly fetched from several words of praise to the Lamb, in several Psalms of David; one of these two things (if not both) will from hence justly be deduced.

1. Either this, that any of those Psalms of David may be sung to the praise of the Lamb, out of which those words of praise are fetched (as when the people of God are said to have praised God with such a word in a Psalm, it is meant they sung the whole Psalm; as 2 Chronicles 5:13 and 20:21, Ezra 3:11) all of them pointing at Psalm 136.

Or else secondly, that it may be lawful upon special and extraordinary occasions, to compile a spiritual song out of David's words of praise dispersed in several Psalms of David, and other Psalmists in Scripture, and to sing them, composed together as a Psalm of praise to the Lord. And both these willingly admit: for these are still the divine meditations, and spiritual expressions of the holy men of God in Scripture, which God has prepared for the setting forth of his own glory.

Object. 7. As the Apostle writing to Timothy about prayer in general, and prescribing no form of prayer, it is therefore justly argued, that we are to use no set forms of prayer at all: so the same Apostle exhorting the Churches to sing, and not prescribing any forms of Psalms, hence it follows, that he allows not the singing of David's Psalms. And whatever arguments strike against stinted forms of prayer, strike against all forms of Psalms also, as stinting and quenching the Spirit, etc.

Answ. 1. It is not true, that the Apostle exhorting to sing, does not prescribe any forms of Psalms. For in the same texts where he does exhort the Churches and people of God to sing, he does direct them also to sing Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs: which are the express titles of the very forms of Psalms composed by David and Asaph as has been showed above. Neither can it be truly said, that he allows not the singing of David's Psalms. Unless it might be truly said, that the Psalms of David, are neither Psalms, nor hymns, nor spiritual songs.

Answ. 2. The Scripture puts a manifest difference between these two, set forms of prayer, and set forms of Psalms; also between set forms devised and prescribed by men, and set forms appointed by God. Set forms of prayer the Lord did never ordinarily prescribe to his people, neither in the Old Testament, nor in the New: but set forms of Psalms no man doubts, were ordinarily prescribed in the Old Testament, and we suppose in the New also, in the texts alleged.

Again, set forms devised and appointed by men, I will not deny to be justly rejected by the true meaning of the second Commandment: but God that forbade us to make to ourselves any images or imaginations and inventions for worship, did never forbid himself to devise and appoint for us what form of worship himself pleased, either in the Old Testament, or in the New. And therefore whatever arguments strike against set forms of prayer invented and prescribed by men, there is none of them that strikes against set forms of Psalms appointed by God. Neither can it with any color be pretended, that the Psalms of David being devised and appointed by the Holy Ghost himself, should either stint or quench the Spirit, unless it might be thought, that God's own ordinance to convey, and quicken, and enlarge the Spirit, should become an impediment and restraint to the Spirit.

Object. 8. The edification of the Church and body of Christ under the New Testament, ought to be carried on by the personal and proper gifts of God's Spirit (Ephesians 4:7, 8, 11, 16; 1 Peter 4:10, 11; Romans 12:4, 6; 1 Corinthians 12). But in singing of Psalms of David, there is no more personal gift manifested, than there is in reading a stinted form of prayer.

Answ. These Scriptures prove that God has given the gifts of the Spirit for the edification of his Church: and that they who have received the gifts of the Spirit, should employ them to the edification of the Church. And some of those Scriptures prove also, that they who have received any gifts, though outward gifts of wealth and honor, should improve and employ them to the good of the Church. But none of them prove, that all the edification of the Church should be carried on by the personal and proper gifts of the present members of the Church. For then the Church should not be edified now in these days by the gifts of the pen-men of Scripture, whether Apostles, Prophets, or Evangelists, which is expressly repugnant to some of the Scriptures alleged by you. For in Ephesians 4:8 to 13, and in 1 Corinthians 12, it is expressly said, that God gave Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists, for the edifying of the Church, till the whole body of Christ be perfected at the day of his coming. And lest you should dream of new Apostles to be raised up in every age, the Holy Ghost tells us, the Church of the Jews at their last conversion shall be built upon the foundation of the Lamb's twelve Apostles (Revelation 21:14). The twelve Apostles of the Lamb shall have a fundamental influence in the rearing and building of the Church of the Jews, not by their resurrection to life again in those days, but by the power of the Spirit breathing in their gifts and writings. And as Abel being dead yet speaks (Hebrews 11:4), and that to edification: so the Apostles though dead speak also; and David being dead speaks, and sings likewise to the edification of the body of Christ, till we come to sing Hallelujahs in heavenly glory.

Say not these writings of the Apostles and Evangelists, of David and the Prophets, do not speak to the edification of the Church, but as they are expounded and applied by the spiritual gifts of the Ministers and people of God in each age. For the very reading of them is an ordinance of God, and no ordinance of God is empty and beggarly, and destitute of the Spirit: which is the vanity of men's traditions, and may not be imputed to any of God's ordinances.

Neither ought you to say, that in singing the Psalms of David, there is no more personal gift manifested, than there is in reading a stinted form of prayer.

For 1. in reading a stinted form of prayer, there is no gift of the Spirit at all manifested, but rather (as I conceive) a manifest breach of the second Commandment of God, which is a grieving of the Spirit. But in singing of the Psalms of David, there is a gift of the Spirit manifested, even the gift of obedience to the command of the Apostle. And that is the personal gift of him that sings.

And secondly, all the treasures of the gifts of the Spirit breathing in the Psalms of David are likewise manifested in the reverent and holy singing of them. You might more truly have said, there is no more personal gift of the Spirit manifested in singing the Psalms of David than in reading the Psalms of David; because either of both those duties are alike acts of obedience to God's Commandment. But if you had so said, your objection had answered itself.

Object. 9. Many of God's people now have gifts to compose spiritual songs, as well as carnal poets to make carnal sonnets, or as drunkards that make songs of God's people. Now every one that has a gift is to administer it by Christ's command (1 Peter 4:10). And if any for want of experience of such a gift in themselves, should question it, they may consider the promise of pouring out the Spirit in a more plentiful measure, now in the days of the New Testament, than in the old.

Answ. 1. Though many of God's people have gifts to compose spiritual songs, as well as carnal poets carnal sonnets, and drunkards profane sonnets; yet that will not argue, that the spiritual songs, which many of God's people have gifts to compose, are fit to be sung in the public holy assemblies of the saints, no more than the carnal and profane sonnets of drunken poets are fit to be sung in civil assemblies. Let drunken carnal poets sing their carnal sonnets in their taverns and alehouses, and such of God's people as have received a gift to compose a spiritual song fit for their private solace, sing it in their private houses. But every spiritual song, fit for private solace, is not fit to be sung in the solemn assemblies of the Church for public edification: no more than it is fit for every private Christian who has a gift to compose a spiritual prayer to utter and pour forth the same in the public congregation of the Church.

Answ. 2. It is more than probable, that many of the people of God in the old Testament had gifts to compose spiritual songs, besides David and Asaph: and yet unless their gift were carried along by an infallible Spirit, they were not received among the songs of the Temple.

Answ. 3. Suppose that spiritual songs composed by an ordinary gift, might be received among the public songs of the congregation, yet will it from there follow, that the Church shall be bound to sing only such songs, and deprive themselves of the Psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs of David and Asaph, which were composed with a far larger measure and power of the Holy Ghost?

Answ. 4. It is readily granted, that as every man has received a gift, so let him administer and dispense it, according to the text alleged (1 Peter 4:10). But yet in Christ's way, every private gift is not fit for public administration; nor every public gift fit to be administered to the shouldering out of a greater gift than itself.

Answ. 5. If such as want the experience of such a gift of spiritual poetry in themselves, should be encouraged to expect it from the promise of pouring out the Spirit on all flesh in the days of the Gospel (Acts 2:17), they might as well look for the gifts of tongues, and healing, and miracles. For it is the same Spirit (though not the same measure) which is there promised to be poured out upon all flesh; let every man administer the gifts of the Spirit, according to the measure which he has received within his own line.

Object. 10. But the Lord is as full of the Spirit now to help us to compose Psalms, as in the days of David and Asaph. And it seems a dishonor to Christ, to dispense his word by reading and singing, without the exercise of the glorious and various administrations of the spiritual gifts of the New Testament.

Answ. 1. The Lord is as full of the Spirit now, and as able to furnish us with a prophetical Spirit now to compose prophetical Scriptures, as he did furnish the Prophets in the Old Testament. But yet God thought it no dishonor to Christ to leave us the Scriptures of the old Prophets for our edification in the New Testament, as well as in the old. It is the same Spirit of the same Christ that spoke by the Prophets of the Old Testament, and speaks in the Saints of the New. And it is no dishonor to Christ to dispense his word, and to guide the body of his Church, as well by the unity of the same Spirit, as by the variety of the diverse gifts of the Spirit now. And though we do not exercise the glorious and various administrations of the spiritual gifts of the New Testament, in the composing of new Psalms, no more than in the composing of new Scriptures. Yet we can neither sing the old Psalms of David, nor read the old Scriptures of the Prophets acceptably to God, nor comfortably to ourselves without the exercise of the gracious and various spiritual gifts of the New Testament.

Object. 11. We have examples in the New Testament, of exercising personal gifts, as well in singing, as in praying and prophesying (1 Corinthians 14), which Epistle is directed to all the Saints (1 Corinthians 1:2) in all places. And consequently, that Church is to be precedential in dispensing personal gifts in this ordinance of singing, as well as in any other.

Answ. 1. The directions given in that Epistle to the Church of Corinth, we willingly grant are precedential to all the Churches, as well as the directions given in other Epistles to other Churches. And the directions there given be, that in dispensing spiritual gifts, Prophecy be preferred before Tongues, nor any Tongues dispensed without interpretation; that order be observed without confusion; that diverse may speak without interruption; that no man may speak without subjection; that women be not permitted to speak to usurpation; that all things be done to edification. And all these directions are precedential to all such Churches as have received the like gifts. But there is no direction given to the Church of Corinth, or any other, that every man should have a gift of tongues, or a gift of compiling a Psalm; or if he have a gift of compiling a Psalm for his private use by an ordinary Spirit, that then he should present it to be sung before the whole Church, and the Church to say Amen to his Psalm. For the gift of Psalms, which the Apostle there speaks of, was not an ordinary gift to compile some spiritual ditty in verse, but extraordinary, as joined with the gift of strange Tongues. For it appears by the context, that the gift of Tongues was used by the members of the Church of Corinth, four ways: 1. In speaking mysteries (ver. 2); 2. In prayer (ver. 14); 3. In singing (ver. 15); 4. In thanksgiving (ver. 17). So that the singing there mentioned, was by an extraordinary gift, as the Tongues were, in which it was dispensed.

Object. Indeed the gift of Tongues, wherein these Psalms seem to be uttered, was extraordinary, but it does not follow that the gift of composing those Psalms was an extraordinary gift, no more than prayer wherewith it was joined (ver. 15), or Prophecy (ver. 26). Singing Psalms and Prophecy differing no otherwise than Poetry and Prose; and if it was extraordinary in the Corinthians, we have no warrant for public ordinary singing in the New Testament from any example.

Answ. 1. As the gift of Tongues was extraordinary, so was every ordinance dispensed in it, whether Prayer, or Psalm, or Prophecy, all of them extraordinary, both for sublimity of matter (in the Spirit he speaks Mysteries, ver. 2), and for power and demonstration of the Spirit, and for suddenness and dexterity of utterance without previous study, or meditation, as (Acts 2:4, 11). What though there be an ordinary gift of Prayer and Prophesying, as well as of singing? Yet nevertheless the Apostles and Prophets had an extraordinary gift of Prayer and Prophesying: and so had those Corinthians also an extraordinary gift (though in less measure) of Praying and Prophesying and Singing also.

It is not credible that he who would have new wine put into new bottles, would pour forth ordinary and common matters in new Tongues, and so raise extraordinary expectation of ordinary things.

Answ. 2. It is an uncouth comparison, to make no more difference between singing Psalms and Prophecy, than between Poetry and Prose. In Prophecy we open the Scriptures and counsels of God: in Psalms we open the counsels and thanksgivings of our own hearts. In Psalms we sing to glorify God; in Prophecy we speak to edify men. You might with far more reason and congruity have said, that Prayer and singing Psalms differ no otherwise than Poetry and Prose. And yet there is more difference even between them, than so, as the Apostle James notes (James 5:13).

Answ. 3. When you say, that if the singing in the Church of Corinth was extraordinary, then we have no warrant for our public ordinary singing in the New Testament from any example: neither does the argument follow, nor if it did, is it of any force. For though this example of singing in the Church of Corinth was extraordinary: yet that singing of Christ and his Disciples at the last Supper was ordinary (Matthew 26:30). And though there were no example of public ordinary singing in the New Testament, yet it is enough that there is a precept of public ordinary singing given to the Churches, both of the Ephesians, and of the Colossians (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16). And what the Spirit speaks to those Churches, it speaks to all.