THE TRUE PSALMODY: Chapter III.

IS THERE ANY WARRANT FOR MAKING OR USING IN THE WORSHIP OF GOD, PSALMS OR HYMNS, OTHER THAN THOSE ALREADY PROVIDED BY GOD FOR HIS CHURCH?

---

We here consider,—

I. The arguments employed in defence of the use of uninspired hymns. And,

72 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

I. It is affirmed that these have a Scripture sanction.

(1.) The “sayings” of Mary (Luke i. 46–55,) and the prophecy of Zecharias (Luke i. 68–79,) are regarded as “precedents” which imply such a sanction. This, they certainly are not. For of Mary, it is merely stated, that she “said.” Her utterances are not styled a song; nor is there any evidence that either she herself, or any other, then sang them. They are no more than a hearty outburst of thanksgiving—and no doubt inspired. As to Zecharias, it is said, he was “filled with the Holy Ghost and prophesied.” We are utterly unable to see how this can be construed into a warrant for the making of songs for the church by uninspired men, who do not even profess to “prophesy!” Moreover, all this was under the Old Testament economy, and not under the New.

(2.) Reference is made to the fact that our Saviour and his disciples “sang an hymn, and went out into the mount of Olives,” (Matt. xxvi. 30.) Were it admitted, or proved, that this “hymn” was made for the occasion by our Saviour, or by one of the apostles, what authority would thus be furnished for the making of hymns by mere men, and these uninspired? Certainly, none at all. But this “hymn,” it is now almost universally acknowledged, was the “Great Hallel,” consisting of a num-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 73

ber of consecutive Psalms, which we now find in their order, in the Book of Psalms, and always sung at the close of the paschal feast. Dr. Clarke, himself an advocate for the use of uninspired hymns, says, “As to the hymn itself, we know from the universal consent of Jewish antiquity, that it was composed of Psalms 113, 114, 115, 116, 117 and 118, termed by the Jews HALLEL, from HALLELU-JAH, the first word in Psalm 113th. These six psalms were always sung at every paschal solemnity. They sung this great hallel on account of the five great benefits referred to in it; namely, 1. The exodus from Egypt. 2. The miraculous division of the Red sea. 3. The promulgation of the law. 4. The resurrection of the dead. 5. The passion of the Messiah.”*

(3.) A warrant for the use of uninspired compositions is sought in Eph. v. 19, and Col. iii. 16,—and on these the advocates of “hymns” lay the greatest stress. That these passages will not bear the interpretation put upon them as enjoining, or favouring the use of uninspired songs, is thus satisfactorily shown by Dr. Cooper.

“It is admitted by those who urge these passages as authorizing the use of other songs, than

_____

* For further allusions to this subject, see quotation from Dr. Cooper on Eph. v. 19; &c.

74 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

those contained in the Word of God, that the ‘Psalms’ which we are here enjoined to sing are the Psalms of inspiration. We have the highest authority for regarding it as an admitted fact that the psalms here referred to are the psalms of David. We have the authority of the editors of the Princeton Repertory, a work published under the auspices and sustained by the patronage of the Old School Presbyterian Church, and edited by men of superior learning and talent. In the vol. for 1829, the editors say, in an article entitled, ‘The sacred poetry of the early Christians,’ ‘We can hardly conceive it possible that the psalms of David could have been so generally adopted in the churches, and so highly esteemed by the best of the fathers, unless they had been introduced and sanctioned by the Apostles and inspired teachers.’ Again, they say, ‘It seems more correspondent to scripture usage to consider the term psalms here as meaning the book of psalms, as used in Luke xxiv. 44, and equivalent to βίβλος ψαλμων, Luke xx. 42, Acts i. 20, to which the New Testament writers so frequently refer for prophecies, proofs and illustrations of their facts and doctrines.’ In another part of the same article, the reader will find the following remark, which will, no doubt, commend itself to his good sense: ‘As the first Christians were drawn from the synagogue, they naturally

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 75

brought with them those songs of Zion which were associated with their earliest recollections and best feelings, and appropriated them to the services of the New Dispensation.’ Olshausen, in his Commentary on Eph. v. 19, says, ‘ψαλμοι (psalms) are probably here the psalms of the Old Testament, which passed from the synagogue into the church service.’ Bengel also calls them the psalms of David. In addition to this we may adduce the fact that the book of Dr. Watts is professedly made upon an admission that the psalms here mentioned by the Apostle are somehow or other the psalms of David, for we have in this collection one hundred and fifty psalms which were doubtless made on this presumption. We then, surely, have the very best reasons for coming to the conclusion that all parties are agreed that the Apostle here refers to the psalms of David. Indeed the denial of this would be attended with so many difficulties that we do not apprehend, that the friends of human compositions will be disposed to take any other position. We wish the reader, in the subsequent discussion, to bear this in mind.

“The true and only question then before us, is, Have we any reason for supposing that the ‘hymns’ and ‘spiritual songs’ here mentioned, are any thing different from the ‘psalms?’ It will not do to assume a difference. That difference must be

76 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

proved in order to justify a resort to these passages as authorizing the use of any thing else than the Book of Psalms. The reader will notice here, that the burden of proof rests on those who take the position, that the hymns and spiritual songs here mentioned are such as are not contained in the word of God. Here is the very question at issue between us and our brethren. It is apprehended that multitudes interpret these passages under the force of their own practice and the preconceived views upon which that practice is based. For instance, they are using, and have been from their earliest recollections, using a book containing religious devotional poems under the distinct head of ‘Psalms,’ bearing in point of number an exact correspondence with the divine collection, and also in point of sentiment some resemblance to it. In addition to these, there is also a large number that are published under the head of ‘Hymns.’ As these are always called hymns and the others psalms, the idea associated with the former word as it occurs in these passages, is, that they are something like what is found in their book. Very little reflection, however, must suffice to show any person, that as these passages were written by the Apostle many centuries before the existence of any hymn-book now in use, so we must go to some other source if we would ascertain the idea attached to

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 77

this word by the Apostle when directing us to sing not only psalms but hymns. The question for you, reader, to answer, is just this. How do you know, and what reason have you to give, that the hymns mentioned by the Apostle are not those which are contained in the Word of God, instead of this hymn-book of yours which was made, ten, twenty, or fifty years ago? Now, if you can present nothing more than the simple fact that in your book they are called hymns, you must at once see that you have nothing that in the least affects the question of divine authority.

“Perhaps you will be ready to say, are the ‘psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs’ mentioned by the Apostle, only different names for the same things? Suppose we say, Yes? How will you prove that they are not? How will you prove that any one of the inspired collection is not a hymn, or a spiritual song? If you deny it, be so good as to give a good reason for it. The only reason that I can conceive of as capable of being given by you, is that they are called by different names. Well, be so good as to tell us the difference between statutes, and judgments, and commandments in the following passage, 1 Kings vi. 12, ‘If thou wilt walk in my statutes, and execute my judgments, and keep all my commandments, to walk in them; then will I perform my word with thee.’

78 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

Here are different names, and do they not relate to the same things? Are not God’s statutes his judgments, and are they not both his commandments? But suppose we say No—they do not mean the same thing: psalms are not just the same as hymns, and hymns are not just the same as spiritual songs. What then? Why it appears that there is a difference. But the question still recurs, what is that difference? Is it the difference which exists between what is inspired, and what is not inspired? Do you not plainly see that unless you prove such a difference as this, you have not touched the question at issue between us? We may imagine a thousand differences, but they have no relevancy to the point before us; unless they go to show that these names are designed to express what is inspired and what is not inspired. Now, reader, this you never can do. You may try it as long as you please; but you will fail in every effort. This you will see to be the case before we are through with the examination of this passage.

“Here we might with the greatest confidence leave the whole question; God has given to his church a book of praise, and a due regard for him as its author, requires its use until those who offer us some other book, on the ground that he requires us to sing hymns and spiritual songs, show us that hymns and spiritual songs are not to be found in this book.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 79

“But have the friends of an inspired psalmody nothing to support their position, that the Apostle, by these three terms, refers to the same thing, or at least that he does not, by hymns and spiritual songs, mean those which are not inspired? In order that the reader may judge of this, we shall submit to his candid attention the following considerations:

(1.) “The difference contended for by the advocates of human psalmody is not practically observed by themselves. The Old School Presbyterian Church has taken metrical translations of the twenty-third and hundredth psalms, and placed them among their “Hymns.” Let the reader compare these psalms with the prose translation, and we are satisfied that he will at once acknowledge that if there can be such a thing as a metrical translation of the psalms, they may with the greatest propriety be so called. Surely if there be one among the one hundred and fifty of Dr. Watts’ that may be called a psalm, these two deserve the name of ‘psalms.’ Let me ask, then, Are these two metrical translations of the psalms of David, hymns? So have the General Assembly declared. Why may not the rest be called by the same name?

(2.) “If there be a distinction between the psalms and hymns, we are bound by the same mode

80 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

of interpretation to suppose a distinction between the hymns and spiritual songs. But can the reader tell us what this distinction is? Let a hymn or spiritual song be read from their collection, and who can tell to which class it belongs. I may here refer to the practice of those who use hymns of human composition, to show that no such distinction is recognised. I have now before me the Hymn Book now in use in the Old School Presbyterian Church. In looking over it, I find a collection called ‘Psalms,’ consisting of one hundred and fifty. I find also a collection called ‘Hymns,’ consisting of six hundred and eighty. But where is the collection called ‘Spiritual Songs?’ They are not in the book. What plainer proof could we have that no such a distinction as the one contended for is recognised even by those churches that make use of human compositions in the worship of God? Will brethren expect us to recognise a distinction which they themselves practically ignore? Perhaps, it may be said that the collection of ‘Doxologies’ in this book are intended as ‘Spiritual Songs.’ If so, they are not so designated. We have what is called ‘The Christian Doxology’ immediately after the ‘Psalms,’ and then we have what are called ‘Doxologies’ immediately after the ‘Hymns.’ To which of these do they belong? But this is not all, to show how ut-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 81

terly this distinction is ignored. The reader will find among these hymns some that are denominated songs. What could more conclusively show the utter groundlessness of the distinction which the advocates of human composition contend for, and which is made the basis of their interpretation of this passage?

(3.) “There are strong presumptions against recognising such a distinction as the one contended for. Either these hymns or spiritual songs were written by divine inspiration, or they were not. If they were thus written, then we have in this command a direction to sing an inspired psalmody, the very thing for which we contend. But what is the conclusion to which this admission brings us, on the supposition that these hymns and spiritual songs are not found in the Scriptures? The necessary conclusion is, that a part of the inspired writings has been lost, a conclusion to which we are sure the reader would be unwilling to come. The pious feelings of his heart would revolt against it. He will no doubt be ready to say with the editors of the Repertory, that ‘It is not probable that any were written under the influence of inspiration, or they would have been preserved with other inspired writings.’ Suppose, however, we take the other position, and say, with these editors, ‘That men of education, genius and piety,

82 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

employed their talents in the composition of hymns and spiritual odes, which, being approved by the Apostle, were introduced into the services of the church.’ Then—leaving altogether out of view the important fact that we have not now the Apostle to whose judgment we can submit our uninspired hymns, and that they do not profess to have the imprimatur of these holy men—four difficulties present themselves to the mind: (a.) Why is it that we have not, in any of the Scriptures, the least allusion to the making of hymns and spiritual odes by these men ‘of education, genius and piety?’ On this subject there reigns throughout the Scriptures the stillness of the grave. Is not this strange, especially when we consider the importance of praise as a part of Divine worship, and the agitation which ‘the introduction of hymns into the services of the church,’ often produces at the present time? (b.) Is it reasonable to suppose that there would be found in the very infancy of the New Testament church a sufficient number of such men qualified to supply the church with these hymns and spiritual odes? Take these Ephesians, for instance. We know what they were before converted to Christianity. They were sunk in all the ignorance and pollution of idolatry, having been from their childhood worshippers of ‘the great goddess Diana.’ Without at all presuming to call

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 83

in question the existence among them of men of education, genius and piety, we think it is by no means an unreasonable supposition, that it would not have been safe to commit to men just converted from their idolatrous worship, and consequently but partially enlightened and established in the truth, the making ‘of hymns and spiritual songs,’ in which to celebrate the praises of Jehovah. To our mind it would seem to be a dangerous experiment. (c.) The making of hymns by uninspired men, would, in all probability, produce difficulties between the Hebrew and Gentile Christians. In the language of the editors of the Repertory, ‘The Hebrew Christians had probably been accustomed from childhood to consider inspired psalms alone admissible in the worship of the sanctuary, and cherished a holy and even superstitious dread of every thing like innovation or departure from the good old customs of their fathers.’ Is it probable that under these circumstances the apostle would direct to the use of uninspired hymns, when they had ‘those songs of Zion which were associated with all their earliest recollections and best feelings?’ And if the direction in regard to hymns and spiritual songs were only designed for the Gentile Christians, would not their introduction be calculated to keep up a bad state of feeling between these two classes of Christians, who were so disposed to cherish un-

84 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

friendly feelings towards each other? (d.) The strongest presumption, however, that presents itself to our mind against this interpretation is, that it places uninspired compositions upon a par with those which are inspired. Here we have, according to this view, the apostle associating, in the most intimate connexion, that which is confessedly the word of God, with the word of man; and not only so, but directing it to be used for the same end. Now we would address ourselves to that reverence which the Christian reader cherishes for the word of God, and ask him whether an interpretation involving such a presumption as this, is reasonable? Were we to hear him giving an affirmative answer to this question, we must say we would receive it with no little surprise.

(4.) Another evidence in favour of supposing the apostle by these three terms to mean the same thing, is the fact that they are so employed by English, Greek and Hebrew writers who are not inspired, and also by the inspired writers. A multitude of instances might be given, but we shall confine ourselves to a few. In the preface to a late work, entitled ‘The Psalms of David, translated by J. A. Alexander, Professor in the Theological Seminary at Princeton,’ the reader will find the following remarks: ‘A still more marked resemblance is, that they (the Psalms,) are all not

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 85

only poetical but lyrical, i. e. songs, poems, intended to be sung, and with a musical accompaniment. Thirdly. They are all religious lyrics, even those which seem at first sight the most secular in theme and spirit, but which are all found on inquiry to be strongly expressive of religious feeling. In the fourth place, they are all ecclesiastical lyrics, psalms or hymns, intended to be permanently used in the worship of God, not excepting those which bear the clearest impress of original connexion with the social, domestic or personal relations and experience of the writers.’ Now we have this learned and highly esteemed Professor, declaring not only that the Psalms of David are all intended to be permanently used in the public worship of God, (a remark worthy the attention of the reader,) but also that they are all songs and hymns. Will this language be justified? Then why suppose that the apostle means any thing else by these terms, but the same Psalms of David, and why represent those who confine the matter of their praise to these psalms, as opposing the use of hymns and spiritual songs? Josephus refers to the Psalms of David under the name of songs and hymns. The Apostolic Canons contain this injunction: ‘Ετερος τους του Δαβιδ ψαλλετω ὑμνους και ὁ λαος τα ακροστιχια υποψαλλετω. Let another sing the hymns of David, and let the people repeat the concluding lines.’ Here we have

86 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

not only a proof of the very great antiquity of the use of David’s Psalms in the Christian church, but also a proof that they were known by the name of hymns—the very same name in the original which the apostle employs in the text. Dr. Gill tells us that they are spoken of in the Talmud by the name of ‘songs and praises, or hymns.’ Let us now open the sacred Scriptures, and here we shall find proof to the same effect. We find the Psalms called ‘Sepher Tehillim,’ (the Hymn Book,) in the very title of the Hebrew copy of the Psalms. The 145th Psalm is called Tehilla l’ David, which Gesenius translates, ‘a hymn of David.’ The same term is frequently introduced into the body of the Psalm. Let the reader compare Psalm 22d and verse 23d of the Hebrew, with the Greek of Hebrews ii. 12, and he will find the declaration of the Psalmist, ‘In the midst of the congregation I will praise thee,’ [ahalleka] rendered by the apostle, [ὑμνήσω,] ‘I will sing a hymn to thee.’ The word Halleluja, which so frequently occurs in the Psalms, is just a call to sing a hymn to the Lord. Other illustrations of this might be given, but let these suffice. Now when we find the sacred writers, and among these the apostle himself, using this very term ‘hymn’ in application to the songs of inspiration, is it not fair to infer that he used it with the same application in the passage before us? But this is

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 87

not all. It is generally supposed that the apostle made use of the Septuagint version of the Scriptures. With this version the Ephesians and Colossians, being Greeks, were no doubt familiar. Let us open then this version of the Psalms, and we will find some of them bearing the title of a psalm, others of a hymn, and others of a song exactly corresponding to the three Hebrew titles, Mizmar, Tehilla and Shir. These words in the Septuagint are the very same as those which are employed by the apostle when he directs the Ephesians and Colossians to ‘sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs.’ Will the reader then look at this, and ask himself whether the probabilities in favour of our interpretation of this passage are not such as almost to amount to a moral certainty. We may just remark, that the editors of the Repertory say, vol. 7, page 76, ‘External evidence places the titles of the Psalms precisely on the same foundation with the Psalms themselves.’ Professor Alexander, of Princeton, says, ‘They are found in the Hebrew text as far as we can trace its history, not as addenda, but as integral parts of the composition.’

(5) “Another consideration which makes it highly probable that the Book of Psalms is intended by the apostle, is the fact that the same language is employed by the evangelist in Matthew xxvi.

88 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

30, where he tells us that the Saviour and his disciples at the celebration of the passover sang a hymn; [ὑμνήσαντες, they having hymned.] That a portion of the Psalms of David was used, is almost universally admitted. Indeed there is hardly any thing upon which commentators seem to be more generally agreed than this. The evidence in its behalf is as strong as it well could be without being positively asserted by the historian. The writings of the Jews abound with testimony to prove that it was their custom during that solemnity to sing the six Psalms of David, beginning with the 113th, and ending with the 118th. There is no evidence that a hymn was made for the occasion, and we know that it was his custom to comply with the observances of the Jews, of which this was one part, and certainly a most appropriate part. Now if it be admitted that the hymn sung by our Saviour and his disciples on this most affecting occasion was an inspired hymn, we argue, from this admission, that the hymns referred to by the apostle in these passages belonged to the same inspired collection. If this inspired collection was used by our Lord and his disciples, the presumption is, in absence of all proof to the contrary, that they would still continue to be used by the disciples. That this admission is made by those who use uninspired compositions, we have only to refer to Mr. Barnes.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 89

He says on this passage, ‘The passover was observed by the Jews by singing, or chanting, the 113th, 114th, 115th, 116th, 117th and 118th Psalms. There can be no doubt that our Saviour and the apostles also, used the same Psalms in their observance of the passover.’ Why then doubt that the apostle referred to the same collection when he told the Ephesians to ‘sing hymns?’ Surely if any argument can be drawn from the usus loquendi of the sacred writers, it is on the side of those who maintain that the reference in this passage is to the Psalms of divine inspiration.

(6.) In the preceding remarks we have looked simply at the names employed by the apostle in designating that which he would have these Ephesians and Colossians to sing. We now request the reader to give us his attention while we present to his consideration some additional evidence, drawn from the language employed by the apostle in connexion with the use of these three terms. (a.) These songs are called ‘spiritual songs,’ [ᾠδαῖς πνευματικαῖς.] The heathen made use of odes. In order to distinguish those which the apostle would have them to use, he calls them ‘spiritual.’ Now we apprehend that there is, in the use of this term, a proof that the songs referred to by the apostle were those contained in the Scriptures. If the reader will take the pains, as we have done, to examine those

90 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

places in the New Testament Scriptures where this word occurs, he will find that in every instance where the reference is not to created spirits, there is a distinct reference to the Spirit of God as the author of that to which the term is applied. Thus ‘spiritual gifts’ are such as are communicated directly by the Spirit. We shall here quote the words of Mr. Barnes on the word ‘spiritual,’ as it occurs in 1 Cor. x. 3, 4, ‘And did all eat of the same spiritual meat, and did all drink of the same spiritual drink, for they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them.’ ‘The word spiritual here,’ says Mr. Barnes, ‘is evidently used to denote that which was given by the Spirit, or by God; that which was the result of his miraculous gift, and which was not produced by the ordinary way, and which was not the gross food on which men are usually supported. It had an excellency and value from the fact that it was the immediate gift of God, and thus called angels’ food, Ps. lxxviii. 25. It is called by Josephus ‘divine and extraordinary food.’ [Antiq. 3. 1.] In the language of the Scriptures, that which is distinguished for excellence, which is the immediate gift of God, which is unlike that which is gross, and of earthly origin, is called spiritual, to denote its purity, value, and excellence; compare Rom. vii. 14; 1 Cor. iii. 1; xv. 44, 46; Eph. i. 3. The idea of Paul here is,

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 91

that all the Israelites were nourished and supported in this remarkable manner by food given directly by God.’ Again he says, ‘The word spiritual must be used in the sense of supernatural, or that which is immediately given by God.’ In addition to the passages to which Mr. Barnes refers, let the reader consult Rom. i. 11; xv. 27; 1 Cor. ii. 13, 14, 15; ix. 11; xii. 1; xiv. 1, 37: Gal. vi. 1; Col. i. 9. Now let this meaning be attached to the word in the passage before us, and we are brought to the conclusion that the songs here referred to by the apostle, are those which were ‘given by the Spirit, or by God,’ which were ‘not produced in the ordinary way,’ but which were ‘bestowed in a miraculous and supernatural manner,’ and where will we find such songs but those which are contained in the Scriptures? In singing the Psalms of David, we know that we are singing such songs, for he himself tells us, that ‘the Spirit of the Lord spake by him, and his word was on his tongue.’ That this is the import of the word spiritual, as here used, is rendered highly probable from the circumstance that the apostle has expressly mentioned the Holy Spirit in the same sentence. (b.) Another reason for this interpretation is, that the apostle directs to the use of these ‘psalms, hymns and spiritual songs,’ as the means of being ‘filled with the Spirit.’ Now is not the word of God, the very

92 THE TRUE PSALMODY

word of God, the means which he makes use of in filling the hearts of his people? When the Saviour prayed that the Father would sanctify his disciples through his truth, he adds, ‘Thy word is truth.’ There we must go, if we would be filled with the Spirit. Out of these living wells we must draw water, with which to refresh our souls. (c.) We find that the apostle directs to the singing of psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, as the means of letting ‘the word of Christ dwell in them richly, in all wisdom.’ Guyse has a sermon on this text, entitled ‘The Scriptures the word of Christ.’ This he shows from three considerations: ‘He is its author;’ ‘He is its great subject;’ and ‘He works and carries on his interest by it.’ ‘The Spirit of Christ,’ we are told, ‘was in the prophets, when they testified beforehand of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow,’ and it is said, ‘He went and preached to the spirits in prison;’ so that the Psalms of David may, with the greatest propriety, be called ‘the word of Christ.’ ‘There is not,’ says Bishop Horsley, ‘a page of this Book of Psalms, in which the pious reader will not find his Saviour, if he reads with a view of finding him.’ ‘We are in these Psalms,’ (says Dr. Russell, in his admirable Letters,) ‘brought, as it were, into his closet, are made the witnesses of his secret devotions, and are enabled to see even the inward work-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 93

ings of his heart.’ Guyse, in the sermon before referred to infers that the ‘word of Christ,’ as here mentioned by the apostle, includes not only the New, but also the Old Testament Scriptures. He remarks, ‘It is in this most extensive view, that our apostle seems to take it, by his speaking, in the remainder of the verse, of teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, and hymns and spiritual songs, which look with a very strong aspect toward the Old Testament writings, some of which are set forth under these titles.’ Add to this the consideration that but a part of the New Testament Scriptures was written at this time, so that we may readily suppose that the reference of the apostle is to the ‘psalms, hymns and spiritual songs’ of the Old Testament Scriptures. At all events they must be such as belonged to the Scriptures, and this is all for which we are now contending. Now the reader will observe that it is this ‘word,’ (not simply the principles of this word, but the word itself,) which the apostle would have these Ephesians to let dwell in them, by singing psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs. Is not this more likely to be done by singing the sacred songs of this word, than by singing those which have been composed by erring man, whatever may be his piety and learning? Is it not more likely that we shall in this way attain to that ‘wisdom’

94 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

of which the apostle speaks in the same passage? We know how it was with David; ‘I have more understanding,’ he could say, ‘than all my teachers, for thy testimonies are my meditation.’

“We have thus given these two passages a careful and critical examination. In this examination nothing has been assumed—not a single idea in the whole process of exposition has been advanced without a reason having been assigned for it. The points have been distinctly presented so that the reader can examine each of these points for himself, as it is laid before him. We now submit this exposition to the candid consideration of all who may desire to know the mind of God as revealed in his word, and with whom in judging of matters pertaining to the worship of God, the great question ever is, What saith the Scripture?

“Having subjected these passages to what we believe to be a faithful and impartial examination, it may not be out of place to inquire how far the result harmonizes with the views of distinguished divines and commentators. A careful inquiry will show that those who maintain that the hymns and spiritual songs mentioned by the Apostle, are those of inspiration, have clearly the weight of authority on their side.

“In an edition of the Westminster version of the Psalms, published in 1673, the reader will find

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 95

a preface signed by the celebrated Dr. Owen and twenty-five others, among whom are to be found the most illustrious divines that have ever adorned the church. Their testimony on the point before us is given in the following words, ‘To us, David’s Psalms seem plainly intended by these terms of psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, which the apostle useth, Eph. v. 19, Col. iii. 16.’

“Ridgely, in his Body of Divinity, expresses the same view, and says, ‘It cannot be denied that the Psalms of David are called indifferently by these names.’

“Dr. Gill, the learned Calvinistic divine of the Baptist school, in the introductory remarks to his commentary on the Book of Psalms, says, ‘To these several names of this book, the apostle manifestly refers in Eph. v. 19, Col. iii. 16.’ In his exposition of Eph. v. 19, he thus expresses himself, ‘The hymns are only another name for the Book of Psalms,’ and ‘by spiritual songs are meant the same psalms of David, Asaph, &c.’

“Calvin, according to Doddridge in his note to Col. iii. 16, ‘thinks all these words refer to David’s poetical pieces.’

“Beza, according to Macknight, ‘thinks psalms in this passage denote those poetical compositions in which David uttered his complaints and prayers; also those historical narratives by which he in-

96 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

structed the people; and hymns are his other compositions in which he celebrated the praises of God.’

“Macknight limits the ‘psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs mentioned by the apostle, to those which were ‘recorded in the Scripture,’ and to such as were ‘dictated by the Spirit.’ The same view is expressed by the continuators of Henry’s Commentary, and by Bloomfield, Brown, Horne, Durham, Daillé and others.

“The reader will see from the authorities to which we have referred, that our criticisms on these passages present them in no new light to the church. Indeed, we question whether any one of the evangelical denominations can find any thing like the same authority, either in point of weight or variety, for their interpretation of any of the proof texts on which they rest any thing that is distinctive in their profession, either in relation to doctrine, worship, or government.”

I. Some use is made in defending “hymns” of Isaiah xxvi. 1, “In that day shall this song be sung in the land of Judah,” &c. It is obvious, however, to remark, (1.) That this, if a “song” literally intended to be sung, is an inspired one; how then can the language of the prophet be an argument for the use of uninspired hymns? At most, it can only touch the question, whether any Bible songs may be used in worship other than those con-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 97

tained in the Book of Psalms? (2.) If sung, it must be sung as given, in a literal translation, though metrical. Hence, this passage contains no argument for even a paraphrase—using the term in its modern acceptation. But (3.) It is by no means certain that it was intended that this passage should be used as a part of the Church’s manual of praise: for had this been the design of the Spirit, how did it happen that this “song” was not introduced into the worship of the church from the earliest period, and continued down to our day? Surely there has been some strange oversight here! Whatever use has been made of this passage in song, has been, so far as any testimony appears, of very late date. (4.) The prophecy has been accomplished, however, and the saints have used with gratitude this language in magnifying the power, and faithfulness, and mercy of Judah’s Saviour and King, although they have not sung this passage in their exercises of devotion. (5.) Have the advocates of “hymns” given this song any prominent place in their public praises?

We cannot find the Scripture warrant which is claimed for uninspired songs in God’s worship. The Bible gives them no sanction.

II. It is affirmed that such hymns and songs have the sanction of long and general use in the Christian church: and some have gone so far as to

98 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

put hymn-singing under the rule, that what the people of God always, and in all places have held, is right; regarding the exceptions as so few, that they may be left entirely out of the account. In reply, we might content ourselves with the re-assertion of the principle which holds a high place in the estimation of the purest Protestants, namely, that the practice of the church is of small moment in settling any controversy in regard to faith or duty, unless we go as far back as apostolic times, and ascertain the apostolic sanction; or, in other words, except as we find these matters of faith and duty recorded or exemplified in the sacred Scriptures. We are persuaded, however, that those with whom we now reason, can find no such use of hymns in the Christian church, as implies the Divine approbation, or even until a late period, a full ecclesiastical sanction.

For greater distinctness in considering the subject, we divide the history of the Church into three periods—the Primitive, the Mediæval, and the Reformed.

1. The Primitive, extending from the close of the first century, down to the fourth or fifth.* And here we state: (1.) That no hymn can be traced

_____

* Strictly taken, the limits of the Primitive Church, would be narrower than this.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 99

back to apostolic times. A late writer*—almost an enthusiast in reference to hymns, but who has carefully examined his ground, says, “Three Hymns have come down to us from early times.” These are the “Tersanctus,” the “Te Deum,” and the “Gloria in Excelsis.” Of these, the “Te Deum” belongs to the later periods of the fourth century: of the “Tersanctus,” or “Thrice Holy,” it is said that “all that can be discovered” is, that it “can be found in the earliest known liturgies:” and of the “Gloria in Excelsis” that it is “possibly or probably more ancient than any thing Clement of Alexandria, the earliest hymn-writer, ever wrote.”† And of all the “Anonymous Greek Hymns,” this writer says, “Whether, therefore, the greater purity of many of these anonymous hymns arises from their greater antiquity, or from a fresh approach to that ever-present Fountain in an age when many had recourse to polluted waters and broken cisterns, is a problem we may contentedly leave unsolved.” Now had hymns been used with apostolic sanction,

_____

* The author of a work entitled, “The Voice of the Christian Life in Song: or, Hymns and Hymn-writers of Many Lands and Ages,” understood to be by a clergyman of the English Establishment. The edition from which we quote, is that of Robert Carter & Brother, New York, 1859.

† Clement lived at the end of the second century.

100 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

could they have so completely perished? No kind of literature is so certainly transmitted to future generations as songs. Is it possible, that songs which had been sung by the apostles, and apostolic churches, should have so completely disappeared from the life and memory of the church? (2.) The Scripture Psalms were used from the earliest periods of the church, and the weight of evidence is in favour of their exclusive use in the apostolic church. The Biblical Repertory (1829,) says “From the Jewish synagogue, sacred music very naturally passed into the Christian sanctuary. Our blessed Lord himself, on that memorable night when he instituted the sacramental memorial of his dying love, furnished the transition act by concluding the solemnity with a hymn.* As the first Christians were drawn from the synagogue, they naturally brought with them those Songs of Zion, which were associated with all their earliest recollections and best feelings, and appropriated them to the service of the new dispensation.” It adds, speaking of alleged changes of an early date, “In the hands of apostles or Christian poets of apostolic times, we have no information. At a later period we find Psalms in general use in the churches, and judged

_____

* The Hallel, some portion of Psalms 113 to 118. Princeton Bib. Repertory for 1829.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 101

by the fathers the most estimable portion of their religious services. The Apostolical Canons contain the injunction; ‘Let another sing the hymns of David, and let the people repeat the concluding lines.’† We can hardly conceive it possible that the Psalms of David could have been so generally adopted in the churches, and so highly esteemed by the best of the fathers, unless they had been introduced or sanctioned by the apostles and inspired teachers.”* Neander, who without furnishing any direct proof of his statement, speaks of hymns at this early date, furnishes evidence in the following quotation against his own view, well suited to our purpose, “Besides the Psalms which had been used from the earliest times, and the short doxologies and hymns consisting of verses from the holy scriptures, spiritual songs composed by distinguished church teachers, were also introduced among the pieces used for public worship, in the Western church. To the last named practice much opposition, it is true, was expressed. It was demanded, that, in conformity with the ancient usage, nothing should be used in the music of public worship, but what was taken from the sacred scriptures. As sectaries and heretical parties often had recourse to church Psalmody to spread their own religious

_____

† [This shows that, from the earliest days, continuous singing has not been the practice of the church. The singing was responsorial with precentor giving out the line and the people responsively singing after he completes the line. Apostolical Canon 15 reads: “Alius psalmos David decantet, populus autem extremas voces consonet.” ED.]

* Princeton Biblical Repertory for 1829.

102 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

opinions, all those songs which had not been for a long time in use in the church, were particularly liable to suspicion.”* In this, Neander is treating of a comparatively late period, and yet, even then the introduction of hymns, although written by “eminent teachers,” was “opposed,” and the “ancient practice” was acknowledged, and, it would seem, maintained to be, that nothing should be sung but what was “contained in the sacred Scriptures.” Hence, even these songs, which are said to have been “long in use,” unless they were Scripture Psalms, must have been introduced after the times then called “ancient,” going back to the apostolic. The significant fact, however, is, that the introduction of “hymns” was, at that time, an innovation. (3.) The first known hymn-writer was Bardesanes, “a native of Ædessa, a man of mind, of a Gnostic sect, and of course a zealous opponent of the doctrine of the Godhead of Christ, in the second century. He was among the first, if not the first, that was distinguished for the composition of new hymns. The Gnostic doctrines were poetic, and they were made popular, and widely extended by the hymns and odes of this heretical poet, and those of his more distinguished son, Harmonius, who, with his father, espoused

_____

* Hist. ii. 318.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 103

the same bad cause. Bardesanes “IMITATED David, that he might be adored and recommended by similar honours. For this purpose he composed 150 psalms.’* Into those psalms and hymns he infused his corrupt and mystic doctrines, rendering them agreeable to the taste of his readers ‘by the charms of novelty, and the embellishments of oriental style.’ And it is added, ‘Thus the Syrian church was in danger of being overflowed with Gnostic errors through the mighty vehicle of song.’”† The next in order, is Clement, already mentioned. He wrote but one hymn, but whether to be sung, or whether it was sung in the worship of God at the time, is a thing unknown: we have seen no evidence that it was. (4.) We have, besides the clear testimony of Neander, ample evidence, some of which we have furnished in our first chapter, that the Psalms of Scripture were most highly regarded, and constantly used in the early church, while hymns were still regarded with suspicion. Augustine says—he is of the fourth century, “The Donatists, too, ‘reproached the orthodox,’ ‘because they sung with sobriety the divine songs of the

_____

* Ephraem the Syrian, as quoted by the Princeton Repertory of 1829, in an interesting article on “The sacred poetry of the early Christians,” p. 530.

† M‘Master’s Apology, pp. 44–45.

104 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

prophets, while they (the Donatists) inflamed their minds with the poetic effusions of human genius.” In the Apostolic Constitutions* we learn that “the women, the children, and the humblest mechanics, could repeat all the Psalms of David; they chanted them at home and abroad; they made them the exercises of their piety and the refreshment of their minds. Thus they had answers ready to oppose temptation, and were always prepared to pray to God, and to praise him, in any circumstance, in a form of his own inditing.” Cassian of the fifth century, says, “The elders have not changed the ancient custom of singing psalms. The devotions are performed in the same order as formerly. The hymns which it had been the custom to sing at the close of the night vigils, namely, the 50th, 62d, 89th, 148th Psalms, &c., are the same hymns which are sung at this day.” And as late as A. D. 561, 563, the council of Braga forbid “the introduction

_____

* Of these Dr. M‘Master says, “The collection of regulations, known under the name of the ‘Apostolical Constitutions,’ made its appearance in the fourth century. Though we may justly dispute its apostolical origin, it may be admitted of sufficient authority, as far as it indicates the customs of the third and following century. We see its testimony respecting the use of the Book of Psalms.”

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 105

of other poetry into the Psalmody of the church, beyond the songs of canonical scripture.”*

The history of this early period furnishes nothing of which the advocates of “hymns” attempt to make much use, excepting a passage in Pliny’s letter to Trajan, early in the second century, and an extract from an epistle of the council of Antioch, A. D., 264, regarding a certain proceeding of Paulus of Samosata. Pliny says, that he had learned that the Christians of Bithynia “were wont to meet together on a stated day, before it was light, and sing among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as God,” &c. But what, we ask with some astonishment, is there in this—even admitting that Pliny’s words are the precise ones that a Christian would have used in speaking of their Psalmody—to countenance the supposition that they sang uninspired compositions? Surely, the Psalms of the Bible exhibit Christ as a divine Person! Does not the apostle Paul take arguments from the Psalms (see Heb. i.) to demonstrate the proper divinity of the Son? Have not a host of Christians, past and present, found Christ in these Psalms, and worshipped Him, in singing them, as a divine Saviour? Nor was the early church ignorant on this subject, as will appear presently.

_____

* Ut extra psalmos vel scripturas canonicas nihil poetice compositum in ecclesia psallatur [That nothing poetically composed be sung in the church, besides the Psalms or canonical Scriptures]. M‘Master, p. 65.

106 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

But, are not the words of a pagan pro-consul rather a slender foundation on which to build so large an edifice of hymn-singing? If hymns were then composed and sung—if this was the custom,—if it had been consecrated, and the songs themselves in a sense, by the death of martyrs, we again ask, what has become of them, and why has it been left to subsequent ages to learn the fact that they existed from one rather vague sentence in a Roman pro-consul’s letter? Certainly, we might look for some more direct and explicit knowledge of so important a fact, through some ecclesiastical channel! How much we have, has been seen already: or, more correctly, that we have nothing of the kind, through the testimony of the church herself.

As to Paul of Samosata, we allow Dr. Pressly to speak. “There is a passage of history in connexion with the life of Paul of Samosata, which has sometimes been referred to, for the purpose of establishing the conclusion that hymns of human composition were in general use in the primitive age, in the orthodox church, and that it was through the influence of heretical teachers, that the Psalms of David were introduced. It will at once occur to the reflecting Christian, that it would be something very strange, if it were really so, that the enemies of the truth should manifest a partiality for a portion of the word of God, which has always

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 107

been peculiarly dear to the humble, practical Christian. But what are the facts in the case just referred to? Paul of Samosata, who rejected the doctrine of our Lord’s divinity, has been represented as banishing from the church in Antioch ‘the old church hymns, that spake of Christ as the incarnate Word,’ and as introducing in their stead the Psalms of David, as being better adapted to the promotion of his heresy.

“That this portion of history, in so far as it stands connected with the subject of psalmody, may be set in its true light, I shall present to the reader an extract from the Epistle of the council of Antioch which condemned the heresy of Paul, together with the Latin translation of the learned Valesius. Our information with regard to this matter is derived from the proceedings of the Council. The original may be seen in Harduin’s Acta Conciliorum, Tom. I, or in the History of Eusebius, Lib. [symbol] cap. 30.

ORIGINAL OF THE EPISTLE.

ψαλμους δε τους μεν εις τον Κυριον ημων Ιησουν Χριστον παυσας, ως δη νεωτερους, και νεωτερων ανθρωπων συγγραμματα· εις εαυτον δε, εν μεση τη εκκλησια τη μεγαλη τη πασχα ημερα, ψαλμωδειν γυναικας Παρασκευαζων. ων και ακουσας τις φριξειεν.

TRANSLATION OF VALESIUS.

“Quinetiam psalmos in honorem Domini Jesu

108 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

Christi cani solitos, quasi novellos, et a recentioribus hominibus compositos, abolevit. Mulieres, autem magno paschæ die in media ecclesia, psalmos quosdam canere ad sui ipsius laudem instituit; quod quidem audientibus horrorem merito incusserit.”

The scholar who examines the original, will see that the following is a literal translation. Paul ‘put a stop to the psalms in honour of our Lord Jesus Christ, as though (they had been) modern, and the compositions of modern men, and prepared women on the great day of Easter, in the midst of the church, to sing psalms in honour of himself.” It will be seen that this translation differs from that which has commonly been given, simply in the rendering of the particle ‘ως. According to the more common interpretation of the passage, this particle has been understood in the sense of because. And hence, Paul is charged with setting aside the psalms which were sung in the church of Antioch, because they were modern.

“But, to say the least, it is not necessary that we should understand the particle in this sense. According to very common usage, it is employed to convey the idea of comparison, or similitude, rather than to signify the reason for which a thing is done. Examples almost innumerable of the following kind, occur in the New Testament. ‘Be ye wise as serpents and harmless as doves.’ Matt.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 109

x. 16. ‘His raiment was white as the light.’ ‘If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed.’ Matt. xvii. 2, 20. ‘He was led as a sheep to the slaughter and like a lamb dumb before his shearer.’ Acts viii. 32. And in Acts xxvii. 30, it is translated correctly, ‘as though,’ as I believe it should be in the passage under consideration. In all such instances it will be seen, that this particle is used to convey the idea of comparison between objects which in some respects resemble each other.

“Understanding the particle in this sense, as employed by the Council, the charge preferred against Paul is, that he took as much liberty with the psalms, which the church in Antioch had been accustomed to sing, as though they had been the compositions of modern men. And the implied idea is, that the psalms which had been sung in that church, were not modern, nor the compositions of modern men, but were the songs of inspiration. And the daring impiety of Paul appeared in this, that he treated the divine songs which celebrate the praises of the Lord Jesus, as though they had been the compositions of uninspired men.

“The Council then, according to this view, do not say that Paul set aside the psalms, which had been sung at Antioch, because they were the compositions of modern men, but, as though they had been of this character. This view, it will be seen,

110 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

accords with the translation of Valesius. He employs the term ‘quasi,’ as though, to express the sense of the original.

“In support of this interpretation of the Epistle of the Council which condemned the heresy of Paul, the following considerations are submitted to the judgment of the unprejudiced reader.

1. “The sacred songs, which the church in Antioch had been accustomed to sing, and the use of which Paul of Samosata is said to have abolished, are termed ‘psalms.’ Neander, it is true, denominates them ‘the church hymns which had been in use since the second century;’ and others describe them as ‘the old church hymns that spake of Christ as the incarnate Word.’ But the Council speaks of them as the ‘psalms.’ Now, while I freely admit that this term does not conclusively establish the fact, that these sacred songs were the Psalms of David, yet it furnishes a strong presumptive argument in favour of this supposition. It will, I suppose, be admitted by all who are concerned in this controversy, that this term is more commonly used to designate the Psalms of inspiration, and that it is not the term usually employed in reference to the compositions of uninspired men.

“But, perhaps it will be said that the qualifying phrase, psalms ‘in honour of our Lord Jesus Christ,’ determines that they were songs composed by men

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 111

for the purpose of testifying to the truth of our Lord’s divinity. To this, I reply, that such a conclusion is by no means legitimate. All that appears from the language of the Council is, that the psalms which were sung in Antioch had reference to Christ, and were in honour of him. Now, if the Psalms of David do bear testimony to the divine dignity and glory of the Lord Jesus Christ; and if they do speak of him as being a divine person, and yet as appearing in our world in human nature; and if the church, in the days of Paul of Samosata, thus understood the psalms, then, it was strictly proper and natural for these advocates of the truth of our Lord’s divinity, to speak of the inspired Psalms as being sung in honour of our Lord Jesus Christ.

“That the Psalms do celebrate the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ; that they do exhibit him to the view of our faith, as a divine person, and at the same time, as a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, it cannot be necessary that I should undertake to prove. It may be sufficient to refer to the numerous instances in which the Psalms are applied to the Lord Jesus, by the writers of the New Testament; and particularly to the declaration of our Lord himself, in which he says to his disciples, Luke xxiv. 44, ‘These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that

112 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.’

“And while it is perfectly evident that Jesus Christ, in his person and work; in his divine dignity, humiliation, sufferings and death; resurrection and ascension into heaven; is the great subject of the Psalms, it is not less evident from the writings of the primitive Christians, that the Psalms were thus understood by them. And this being the fact, it was perfectly natural for them, when speaking of these divine hymns, to represent them as being sung in honour of the Lord Jesus Christ. In confirmation of what has just been said with regard to the sense in which the Psalms were understood by the primitive Christians, it may be sufficient for my purpose to adduce the testimony of Justin Martyr, who wrote about the middle of the second century. In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, in which the particular design of this learned Father is to prove that Jesus Christ is the Messiah promised to the fathers, the Psalms generally are referred to, as furnishing the proof of his position. For example, Justin quotes the 110th Psalm as applicable to the Messiah. And then addressing Trypho, he says, ‘I am not ignorant that you Jews explain this Psalm, as though it referred to Hezekiah.’ But he adds, ‘The words them-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 113

selves declare that it relates to our Jesus.’ After having pointed out clearly the application of this Psalm to the Lord Jesus Christ, Justin addressed Trypho in the following language: ‘That I may convince you, that ye Jews do not understand your own Scriptures, I will mention another Psalm dictated to David by the Holy Spirit, which you contend was spoken with reference to Solomon, your king, but which, in reality, was uttered concerning our Christ.’ It is the 72d Psalm to which Justin here refers; and after repeating the entire Psalm, he remarks, ‘In the conclusion of this Psalm it is written, the hymns of David are ended.’ And then he proceeds to show that the things spoken in this Psalm cannot apply to Solomon, as the Jews were wont to contend, but do relate to our Lord Jesus Christ.

“If, then, the primitive Christians understood the Psalms as referring to the Lord Jesus, as is abundantly evident from the writings of Justin Martyr and others, it was strictly appropriate and natural, when speaking of them, to represent them as being sung in honour of Him. And the language applied to the psalms which were sung in Antioch in the days of Paul of Samosata, very correctly describes the Psalms of David, as they were understood in the primitive ages of Christianity.

114 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

“If it were necessary to adduce further proof in confirmation of what has been said in relation to the sense in which the Psalms were understood by the primitive Christians, it would be easy to multiply testimonies from the writings of Irenæus, of Clement of Alexandria, of Athanasius, of Augustine, and others of similar character, who were distinguished advocates of the truth. Indeed, these Fathers, instead of experiencing any difficulty in seeing their divine Redeemer in the Psalms, appear, from their writings, to have had Him presented to the view of their faith every where throughout these sacred hymns.

2. “But that the Psalms, the use of which Paul abolished, were not ‘the compositions of modern men,’ and could not have been set aside by him under the pretext that they were ‘modern,’ will appear from this consideration: That which he is said to have introduced, would be equally, if not in a greater degree obnoxious to the same objection. The Psalms which he removed were such as were ‘in honour of the Lord Jesus Christ;’ those which he appointed to be sung in their stead, were ‘in honour of himself.’ Now, it is certain that none of the Psalms of David would be adapted to the purpose of celebrating the praises of Paul of Samosata. And it is no less certain that any songs which were in honour of this enemy of the truth,

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 115

must have been modern, and the compositions of an uninspired man. And though Paul was a heretic, it cannot be supposed that he was so perfectly devoid of common sense, as to urge as a reason for setting aside the existing psalmody of the church, a consideration which would apply with greater force to the exclusion of what he proposed to introduce.

“I am aware, that it has been customary to suppose, that Paul introduced the Psalms of David in the room of those which he displaced. Neander says, ‘he probably suffered nothing but Psalms to be used.’ Others not quite so modest, assert without any qualification, that it was the ‘pompous Unitarian, Paul of Samosata, who first set the example of installing the Psalms in the place of exclusive dignity.’ But where, I ask, is the authority for such conjectures, or for such unqualified affirmations? The Epistle of the Council, by whose authority the heresy of Paul was condemned, says no such thing.

“So far from it, the express declaration of the Council is irreconcilable with such a supposition. The psalmody which, according to the Council, Paul introduced, was designed to celebrate his own praise; was in honour of himself. And this could not have been an inspired Psalmody, but must have been a system of which man was the author

116 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

“The conclusion, then, to which I am conducted, taking the language of the Council as my guide, and not suffering myself to be misled by the mere conjectures and suppositions of men, may be exhibited in the following propositions:

1. “The psalmody employed in the worship of God in the church of Antioch, in the days of Paul of Samosata, was a divine system. The psalms which were sung at that time, were in honour of our Lord Jesus Christ. And this character belongs appropriately to the Psalms of David, for they speak of Christ and celebrate his glory.

2. “The daring impiety of the heretic Paul was manifested in this, that he took as much liberty with these Psalms, whose author is the Holy Spirit, as though they had been the compositions of uninspired men.

3. “The psalmody which he introduced was designed to celebrate his own praise. He appointed women in the church, on the great day of Easter, to sing songs in honour of himself, the hearing of which was adapted to fill the pious mind with horror.”*

II. The Mediæval hymnology. From the period at which we have arrived in our inquiries, the subject of psalmody in the time of the Papal apos-

_____

* Pressly, pp. 164–173.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 117

tacy, is, of course, of little account in settling any controversy. As early as the age of Ambrose—who wrote many hymns—and indeed, from the third century, hymns, Greek and Latin, fast multiplied. It was the age of rapid declension in knowledge, in purity, in fidelity to the word of God. Evils of every kind grew apace; soon reaching their culmination in the rise of the Antichrist.

Passing over many centuries, we come to the middle ages, when we note two facts. The first, which we give in the words of the writer of the “Voice of the Christian Life.” Speaking of the hymn-writers of this period, he says, “With one exception, all were monks, and the monotonous routine of monastic life seems in their histories to have replaced the endless varieties of discipline by which our heavenly Father trains His children.” “The one exception to the monastic character of mediæval hymn-writers is King Robert the Second of France, author of the touching hymn, in which all his gentle nature seems to speak, ‘Veni Sancta Spiritus;’ and King Robert had certainly more of the monk than of the king about him. He seems to have been, if ever any man was, made for the cloister, and being forced into the publicity of the throne, he threw as much as possible of the colouring of the convent over his home and his court.”* And

_____

* “Voice” &c., pp. 167, 168, 200.

118 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

again, “We need only study the sacred poetry of the middle ages to understand why the Reformation was needed. One painfully expressed fact meets us at the outset. Of Mone’s ‘Collection of the Latin Hymns of the Middle Ages,’ in three volumes, one is filled with hymns to God and the angels; one with hymns to the blessed Virgin Mary; and one with hymns to the saints.” The second fact is, that the Albigenses and Waldenses—God’s faithful witnesses in southern France, and among the Alps—were Psalm-singers. We quote from Dr. M‘Master: “In the middle ages, the ages too of moral gloom and terrible superstition, the purest section of the church of God was found in the valleys of Piedmont. Among the Waldenses were found the simplicity of the apostolic order, and the purity of evangelical worship. They sung, ‘’mid Alpine cliffs,’ the Psalms of Scripture. And long before the Reformation dawned on Europe, they sung them in metre. ‘The Albigenses, in 1210,’ were metre psalm-singers.’ In those ages when darkness covered the earth, and gross darkness all other people, the Vaudois, as Thuanus, who was their enemy, relates, ‘could all read and write.’ They were acquainted with French so far as was needful for understanding the Bible, and the singing of Psalms. It was required of those who were to be ordained to the ministry along with

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 119

other scriptures, to commit to memory ‘the writings of David.’ Numbers of those, who, under the persecution of the Duke of Savoy, A. D. 1686, sought a refuge in the Swiss cantons, three years after, returned under their pastor, Arnaud, who was also their martial chief. Having overcome their enemies, and regained their native valleys, ‘at the church of Guigon they engaged in worship, sang the 74th Psalm, and their colonel and pastor, Arnaud, preached on the 129th Psalm.’ The morning-star of the Reformation used them. Wickliffe is blamed by some for singing metre psalms. John Huss, in the fifteenth, as Wickliffe had done in the fourteenth century, sung the psalms in verse.”*

These are very significant facts. Hymns made by monks or monkish men; and by none other so far as the record has reached the intelligent author of the “Voice,” &c., while the only witnesses of Christ, in their purity and obscurity, adhered to the singing of Psalms. The lesson is an instructive one. We will not forget it.

III. The Reformed period. The Reformation in Germany, led by Luther, did not reject the use of hymns, although it repudiated en masse, Mediæval hymns. This same reformation, however,

_____

* M‘Master, p. 71.

120 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

retained not a few of the outward appliances of the corrupt system which had succeeded it; and in one instance, at least, approached too nearly the worst heresy of the Papal system.* It was far otherwise with the Reformation in the Western Church: sometimes styled the Zuinglian or Swiss Reformation, with which affiliated the same great movement, in France, Holland, and Britain; and also in some of the German states themselves. We quote again from the “Voice of the Christian Life,” &c. “The Reformed Churches of France and French Switzerland seem to have had no literature corresponding to the hymns of Protestant Germany. Did the peculiar form which the Reformation took in France, then, tend to quench the spirit of sacred poetry, or what other causes brought about this result? When we remember that the same absence of an evangelical national hymn literature, springing up spontaneously as a national growth of the Reformation, which characterizes the Reformed Churches of France and French Switzerland, exists also in the sister Church of Scotland, it is impossible not to connect this fact with the similar form which the Reformation took in all these lands. None of the strictly Cal-

_____

* We mean the Doctrine of Consubstantiation held by Luther.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 121

vinistic communities have a hymn-book dating back to the Reformation. It cannot surely be their doctrine which caused this; many of the best known and most deeply treasured of the more modern hymns of Germany and England have been written by those who receive the doctrines known as Calvinistic. Nor can it proceed from any peculiarity of race, or deficiency in popular love of music and song. French and Scotch national character are too dissimilar to explain the resemblance; whilst France has many national melodies and songs, and Scotland is peculiarly rich in both. Is not the cause then simply the common ideal of external ecclesiastical forms which pervaded all the Churches reformed on the Genevan type? The intervening chapters of Church history are, as it were, folded up, as too blotted and marred for truth to be read to profit in them; and, next to the first chapter in the Acts of the Apostles, was to stand, as the second chapter, the history of the Reformed Churches. Words were to resume their original Bible meaning; nothing was to be received that could not be traced back to the Divine hand. Ecclesiastical order was to be such as St. Paul had established or had found established; clearly to be traced, it was believed, in the Acts and Apostolical Epistles. Thus the Book of Psalms became the hymn-book of the Reformed Churches, adapted to grave and

122 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

solemn music, in metrical translations whose one aim and glory was to render into measure which could be sung the very words of the old Hebrew Psalms.”*

Passing to England, this author proceeds, “The Church of England is, in form, linked to the Mediæval Church by ties far stronger and more numerous than the Lutheran Churches of Germany. The thinking people of England were, after the Marian exiles returned from the Continent, more strongly attracted to the Protestantism of Switzerland and Scotland than to that of Germany. Thus, between Anglicanism and Puritanism, it happened that, until the last century, we cannot be said to have had any national, that is, any people’s hymn-book at all. Probably no person or community ever felt any enthusiasm either for Sternhold and Hopkins, or Tate and Brady; and although some stray hymns have crept into our modern hymn-books from earlier days, until the eighteenth century we had no People’s Hymn-Book; none, that is, that was placed on cottage tables beside the Bible, and sung when Christians met, and chanted beside the grave. The Wesleys seem to have been the first who gave a People’s Hymn-book to England; unless that of Dr. Watts may be called so,

_____

* “Voice,” &c., 252–254.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 123

published about the beginning of the eighteenth century. Not, indeed, that England was silent those two hundred years, or that the sacred chain of holy song was ever altogether broken in our country. We had our ‘Te Deum’ and ‘Magnificat,’ and the English Psalms in the music of their own grand and touching prose—a melody as much deeper to our ears than any metrical manufacture of the same, as the morning song of a thrush is, than the notes of a caged bird that has been painfully taught to sing two or three tunes. These were said in village church and quiet home, making rich melody in the heart, and pealed through the old cathedrals to choral chant, in a language ‘understood of all the people.’ The Prayer-book, with all its musical flow of choice words, floating down on its clear stream of pure English the song and prayer of the true Church of all ages, and the English Psalter,—this was the hymn-book of half our people; while in many a Puritan congregation the heroic purposes of the heart, the individuality of Puritan religion, which made every hymn sung as by each worshipper alone ‘to God,’ must have breathed poetry into any verses, and fused them, by inward fire, into a music no external polish could ever give. With the eighteenth century, however, the history of English Hymn-books must

124 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

begin.”* And of Scotland we need not speak. Her Reformers neither made hymns nor sung them.

Let us now sum up the history of Psalmody, and thus turn the objector’s argument against himself. 1. The “Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” of the Bible passed over to the New Testament Church. 2. There is not a shadow of historical evidence that any other hymns were sung in apostolic times in the worship of God. 3. Some heretics did at an early period make and use hymns; but these earliest of human composures have disappeared, leaving behind them only the fact that they once existed; or, at most, a few waifs which cannot be recognised or allotted to time and space. 4. The first known orthodox hymn-writer lived at the close of the second century, and there is no evidence that the single hymn which he composed was ever sung in God’s worship. 5. Opposition was made at a later period to the introduction of human compositions, while the Psalms of the Bible were held in the highest estimation, and were sung both in the East and in the West. 6. During the middle ages, the Waldenses sang the Psalms: hymns were made by monks and sung in the Popish communion. 7. At the Reformation the Psalms exclusively were used in worship in the

_____

* “Voice,” &c., 255, 256, 259.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 125

“strictly Calvinistic churches.” The Lutheran churches, which retained some of the trappings of Popery, retaining also the use of hymns. 8. The practice of Calvinistic churches was based upon the principle, that the Bible is the only rule in worship. 9. The Church of England was then almost exclusively a Psalm-singing church. 10. No hymn book was found in the Western Reformed Churches until something more than a century ago. Hence, 11. The Scripture Psalms were ever sung in God’s worship in the purest days and parts of the Church—in the apostles’ days, among the Waldenses, and in the most scriptural of the Reformed Churches.

Whatever assistance the cause of hymn-singing may derive from the occasional use of hymns in times, either ancient or modern, when religion had begun to decline, or from their use among the followers of Anti-christ, we cheerfully allow it; but we do claim, that in using exclusively the Bible Psalms, we follow the “footsteps of the flock.”

III. The advocates of these other songs and hymns argue from analogy: we may compose and offer our own prayers, why not hymns also? Dr. Pressly thus satisfactorily disposes of this argument. “However plausible this argument may appear at first view, a little examination may satisfy the honest inquirer after truth, that it is entirely

126 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

fallacious. The things which are compared, are dissimilar, and consequently the reasoning is inconclusive. Prayer and praise agree in one particular, and that is, they are both ordinances of religious worship. But in almost every thing else, they differ. And, therefore, it is a pure assumption to say, that because we may employ our own language in prayer, therefore it is proper to compose in our own language our songs of praise to God. Not only are these religious exercises different in their nature, but, that God himself regards them in a different light, is evident from the fact that he has made provision for his church in the one case, which he has not in the other. But that the reader may see more satisfactorily the difference between these divine ordinances, and the absolute necessity for provision in the one case, which is not necessary in the other; and consequently the fallacy of the conclusion which is drawn by those who reason from the one ordinance to the other; let us notice a little more in detail, some particulars in which they differ.

“1. In prayer, we come to God to ask for those things which we need; but in praise, we ascribe to him the glory which is due unto his name. As our situation and circumstances are ever varying, our wants are very different at one time, from what they are at another. Our petitions must conse-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 127

quently be framed in accordance with our wants. But God is unchangeable, and his praise is always the same. That glory which is proper to be ascribed to his name at one time, will always be proper. No matter what may be our situation; whether we may be in prosperity or in adversity; whether we may be the subjects of joy or of sorrow, still God is to be praised for what he is in himself, and for the exhibitions of his glory which he has made in the works of creation, of providence, and of redemption. And what ascriptions of glory are due to him, the Spirit of God has declared in those psalms, and hymns, and songs, which are the productions of his infinite wisdom.

“2. In social prayer, one leads in the exercise, while others follow and unite with him in presenting their supplications before the throne of grace; but, in praise, all simultaneously lift up their voices together in extolling the name of God. And hence it results, that in the exercise of praise, a written form is absolutely necessary, while in prayer, such form is unnecessary. And hence, as our songs of praise assume a character of permanency, which does not belong to our prayers, we can see an important and obvious reason, why provision should be made for our assistance in the performance of the one duty, which was not considered necessary in the other. And in connexion with this consideration, I remark,—

128 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

“3. That since, in singing God’s praise, a written form is necessary, there is provided for the church, in the word of God, a book of Psalms, while there is no book of Prayers. This is a fact which deserves special attention. The infinitely wise God, does nothing in vain, and never works without design. From every part of the word of God we learn that it is our duty, both to pray to him and to sing praises to his name. And while the duty in both cases is perfectly plain, it is no less evident, that God has made provision with regard to the performance of the one duty, which he has not thought proper to make with reference to the other. Not only are we commanded to sing psalms, but a book of Psalms which contains the songs of the Spirit of purity, of love, and of grace, is provided for our use. Men may say, that ‘as we use our own language in prayer, so may we in praise;’ but the fact that God has himself provided for us a book of Psalms, while he has given us no book of Prayers, rebukes the unwarranted assertion. And from the provision already made for us by HIM who knows the glory due to himself, there is no need for us to prepare songs of praise, unless we are disposed to adopt the presumptuous principle, that we are more competent to decide what is proper to be employed in praising God, than he himself who is the object of praise. But in relation

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 129

to prayer, the case is entirely different. While it is plainly our duty to pray, HE with whom is the residue of the Spirit, has not thought proper to provide for us a collection of prayers. And consequently, in complying with the divine command,—‘In every thing by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto God,’—we must, from the necessity of the case, express our requests in our own language. The reader can, therefore, have no difficulty in perceiving that the cases are dissimilar, and consequently, that it is by no means a legitimate conclusion, that, as we may use our own language in prayer, so may we in praise. But still further,—

“4. Our Lord taught his disciples to pray, and gave them an admirable form of prayer, with reference to which he has said, ‘After this manner pray ye.’ But he gave his disciples no divine song, as a model of praise, according to which they were to compose their songs, with a direction, as in the case of prayer, to sing after this manner. And why, with reverence I would ask, did not the great Prophet of the church, furnish in the New Testament a book of sacred hymns, or direct some one of his Apostles to perform this service? The only rational answer which can be given to this inquiry, is, that he did not consider it necessary. He had already raised up a sweet Psalmist of Is-

130 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

rael, whom he had qualified for the work, and by whom he had provided for his church, such a collection of psalms, and hymns, and songs, as to his infinite wisdom and goodness seemed proper.

“And with regard to the difference between these two religious duties, I observe once more,—

“5. That as provision has been made in the case of praise, which has not been made with regard to prayer, so there is a promise of divine help in the performance of the duty of prayer, which is not given in relation to praise. It is graciously promised by Him who is the hearer of prayer,—‘I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplications.’ (Zech. xii. 10.) And as the Christian needs assistance in performing the duty of prayer, for which provision has not yet been made, we find it written,—‘The Spirit also helpeth our infirmities; for we know not what we should pray for as we ought; but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.’ (Rom. viii. 26.) Here then, we see that the God of grace, who knows what the Christian needs, has graciously promised divine assistance to direct us in the expression of our requests in prayer. ‘We know not what to pray for as we ought; but the Spirit helpeth our infirmities.’ We have no book of Prayers, in the use of which we

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 131

may make our requests known unto God; but we have the promise of the aid of the Spirit of grace and of supplications, to help our infirmities, and to instruct us how to pray. But there is no promise in all the New Testament, of the aid of the Holy Spirit, as the Spirit of psalmody, to aid us in preparing our songs of praise. He, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, did not think proper to raise up, under the gospel dispensation, a sweet Psalmist of Israel, to provide for the church a system of songs, as he had formerly done; nor did he commission any of his Apostles to perform this service; nor did he promise to send his Spirit in any subsequent age, to qualify any man for the execution of a work of such importance. And why not? The only satisfactory answer which can be given, is, that such a service was unnecessary, since it had already been performed.

“It is then quite manifest, not only, that prayer and praise are religious duties, which are different in their nature, but that God himself regards them as so different, that in his infinite wisdom he has thought proper to make that provision for the use of his church in the one case, which he has not in the other. It is no valid objection to our reasoning to say, that some of the psalms are termed prayers; that the language of prayer is employed throughout the psalms; and that in prayer we as-

132 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

cribe praise to God. All this may be true. In these particulars and in others which might be mentioned, there may be a coincidence between these two exercises of religious worship. But still, it remains true, that prayer and praise are not only two different ordinances, but that God regards them as different; and has made provision to aid us in the performance of the duty of praise, which he has not furnished for our assistance in prayer. And consequently, to say, that since it is proper in prayer to use our own language, therefore it is right to do the same in singing God’s praise, is to reason after the manner of men, but not in accordance with the wisdom of God.”*

IV. The right to make and use “hymns” is claimed to be a part of our Christian liberty: and, in this connexion we are reminded of the character of the New Testament dispensation as one of greater light, freeness and enlargement, than the old: and, perhaps, it may be suggested, likewise, that such as decline to use “hymns” are rather narrow-minded and illiberal.

But, what is the Christian liberty of the New Testament dispensation? Most certainly it is not a liberty to form our doctrinal belief, or rules of life, or religious observances, irrespective of the

_____

* Pressly on Psalmody, pp. 120–125.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 133

Word and authority of Christ. It consists in part—the part which alone can have any relation to the issue before us—in our liberation from the bondage of the Mosaic ritual and ceremonial law. This was a burdensome service. But was it ever a “bondage” to sing the Psalms of inspiration? to hold fellowship with the Most High in the exercise of praise, in the very thoughts and expressions which He himself had furnished? It never was—none will dare to say so—and it is not now. This argument is a most decided example of that kind of fallacious reasoning which is styled “begging the question.” The issue before us is, “Have we liberty to make and sing in the worship of God, songs other than those of the Bible?” Yes—say these reasoners—we have this liberty,—because—we have this liberty! We answer, this is the very issue on which we are brought into conflict; and you do not prove your position by asserting it, however often and confidently.

V. It is said that songs composed by uninspired men, may be read with edification, and even uttered in musical, instead of mere speaking tones, by an individual, and why not use them in religious worship? We are not disposed to deny the premises here affirmed. We do not go so far as to maintain that the human voice may not be used in singing, as well as in reading, other songs than those in which God

134 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

is formally worshipped. But there must be, and is, a wide difference between the singing of songs for recreation, or even as an expression of our own emotions whether sad or joyful, and the employment of songs in the solemn and devout, prescribed worship of God. There is an ordinance of praise, which this reasoning leaves entirely out of view. Any one who is capable may write a religious essay. He may read it in the hearing of others. Any one may speak on religious topics in social intercourse. But there is still the ordinance of preaching, and the institution of the ministry, established and guarded by the will of Christ. Nor is every utterance of gospel truth by a Christian minister, the formal preaching of the Word. So, there is an institution of government and discipline in the house of God; and yet, it is competent to every Christian to admonish and warn his erring brother. Again, every act that we perform in our daily avocations should be done to the “glory of God;” and yet there are exercises properly and formally devotional. Every day should the Christian live unto Christ, yet is there one day in seven set apart, specially, for religious worship. As we peruse the Bible, and so in reading Christian biography, we may read many prayers, and be instructed and quickened by them, but there is still an ordinance of prayer. Any one may, under certain circum-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 135

stances, put into another’s hand, a morsel of bread and a cup of wine, but there is, notwithstanding, the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper. We may make pictures—these may represent scenes of deep religious interest,—the sufferings of the martyrs, the trials of the persecuted, or other events calculated to stir up devout recollections, or grateful emotions: we may have them in our dwellings, we may look upon them; and be edified as we do so.

Now, would we listen to one who would attempt to demonstrate that there is no ministry, no church discipline, no holy day, no sacrament of the supper, no formal prayer, by insisting upon the right, or the duty of private Christians to give utterance to the truths of the gospel, to rebuke the sinner, to lead a holy life, to “to do all in the name of the Lord Jesus,” to feed the hungry and minister to the sick, to read the prayers offered by the saints in their day? Or, from the lawful use of paintings in our dwellings, will any one of us, argue—we know who do thus argue—that these, and similar appliances, may be introduced into our places of worship as “aids to devotion?” So, in answer to this argument, we say, there is an ordinance of praise, and when we inquire of the word of God, how this ordinance is to be observed, we find not only that it is a scripture ordinance, but also that provision has been made for its observance—

136 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

and, as we shall see hereafter, for wise reasons—in a Book of Psalms, itself sufficient as a manual of praise. We must not confound, as this argument does the reading,* or even the singing of songs, however good, and the formal celebration in acts of worship, of God’s high praises.

But what is the ordinance of praise? Does it consist merely in the use of musical instead of reading tones? And can there be so much difference between these two modes of uttering the same sentiments, as that the one is allowable, and the other not? This is a very subtle form of the general argument which we have just considered. And we remark, (1.) That the same kind of reasoning would be equally available, as we have seen, to confound other religious acts and ordinances with the doings of every day, or of the Christian life. (2.) It is not the mere use of singing tones, but the design of the act, and its circumstances, which we are here to consider, just as we do in reference to baptism, the Lord’s supper, and laying on of hands in the act of ordination. Are we engaged in celebrating God’s praise in song, according to his appointment, and in circumstances to which that appointment relates? If so, we must have

_____

* Erskine’s Gospel Sonnets are excellent reading; but were never meant for “hymns,” or used in worship.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 137

regard to something more than the tones merely in which we utter our praises. We must take with us the entire institution of praise as a part of the prescribed order of worship. Hence, (3.) It is most important to remember that we have a book, provided by Him whose name we magnify in song; and appointed for this very end; and no command or promise, regarding another. Had we a book of prayers in the scriptures—were we commanded to use this—were there no precept enjoining the use of any prayers not contained in this book—were there no promises of help in making prayers, the whole ordinance of prayer would be comprehended within this inspired liturgy with the appropriate and prescribed restrictions, seasons, &c. We have no such prayer book; but we have a hymn—or Psalm book,—similar in position, in reference to the ordinance of praise, as our supposed inspired prayer book to that of prayer. Hence, we ought to infer, that in singing praises, this alone is to be used; whatever other uses we may lawfully make of song. (4.) If there were no difference between reading and singing, we might omit the singing entirely, and only read Psalms and hymns! would this be the ordinance of praise? (5.) God has linked singing of Psalms to the ordinance of praise, and we should not cavil about it, as if there were no material difference.

138 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

(6.) While we do not undertake to assign the reasons for this divine ordinance, we may be at liberty to say, that song is a powerful medium of propagating sympathy, as well as of awakening it; and, again, that there are proofs abundant, arising chiefly from the peculiar power of songs over the faith, &c., of those that use them in their devotions, that it was not unbecoming the divine wisdom to make this restriction.

VI. It has been said, that inasmuch as the minister of Christ uses his own words in his public ministry, and may even quote a hymn, we may do so likewise, in singing praise: and this, for the reason, that preaching is a part of public worship. To this, it is enough in this place, to reply, that there is a vast difference between addresses made to God in song, and an address made to an assembled congregation; the preacher does not preach to the Most High—he speaks to the people before him. He who would confound these under the general name of “worship” has yet to learn the proper nature of each part of our social religious exercises.

VII. An argument is taken from the fact, that men have now the “gift of song,” implying, it is said, that they may use it in providing songs for the church’s use in her devotions. To this we reply, (1.) The gift of song existed under the Old Testament, and yet none, unless such as were

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 139

specially inspired of God, were employed in composing songs for purposes of devotion. (2.) We hear nothing of any poet in the apostolic Church undertaking to make hymns; not one hymn can be traced to the days of the apostles—and yet there were some, no doubt, who could have written in metre. Paul could, we are quite confident, yet we have no hint of any attempt on his part, to make a hymn-book. (3.) If there be any validity in this argument, it takes a wide sweep. If the possession of the gift confers the right to use it in making songs for the church, who can refuse to adopt and sing any given hymn: the poet can claim a divine sanction—authority direct from Heaven, and who dare repudiate any of his works? (4.) The church, in her members, has the gift of speech! Is every one that can speak, entitled to claim the office of the ministry? It is not enough to have the gift, there must be a warrant to use it for this specific purpose in the house of God. And so of song. Let those who have the gift show us a scripture warrant—we have seen that they cannot—to prepare us songs other than those of the Bible. (5.) There is still among men, and some of them Christians, the gifts of sculpture, &c., must we employ them to provide us statues and ornaments for our churches? (6.) This is, again, a “begging of the question.” We deny the right to use this gift for

140 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

this particular purpose. To establish this right, they must furnish us with better authority than the mere possession of the gift.

VIII. It is affirmed that godly men have favoured the use of hymns—have composed and sung them during their lives—have been edified by them—and have died without experiencing any scruples upon this subject.

The facts asserted in this argument, we may admit. Devout men have so thought, and so acted; but the conclusion we utterly repudiate. To receive all that even excellent men have held, would make strange work in the church. Many good men have lived in the belief of doctrines more or less erroneous, and have retained their errors to the last. Should we adopt these errors, or even tolerate them? Good men have differed in relation to important matters of practice, as well as of faith. Some have been Presbyterians, some Episcopalians, some Independents. The Jansenists—and some of these were pious men, held many of the errors of the Popish system, particularly the Papal supremacy. What kind of a church that would be, which should attempt to combine in one system, upon the authority of the pious and devout, these heterogenous, and often positively inconsistent principles can scarcely be imagined: certainly, it could not be described. We would have a parity

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 141

of the ministry and diocesan bishops! A prayer book, and no prayer book! government by sessions, by presbyteries, &c., and by the people, presbyters being excluded! The Pope acknowledged, and at the same time renounced as the Antichrist! To say nothing of a profession in the same church of conflicting opinions on important matters of faith. And as to the edification of good men by the use of such songs—it is not impossible that the truths which they may contain, may be employed for this end by the Spirit of God, even when the songs themselves are improperly used. Of this we have no need to judge.

The truth is, in this whole matter, men are no rule of faith, or of duty. “To the law, and to the testimony.” The Word of God alone, is a “lamp unto the feet—a light unto the path.” Men—good men—owing to the imperfection of human knowledge, may build upon the one foundation, “wood, hay, and stubble,” and still be saved, while their works shall be burned up; (1 Cor. iii. 11–14;) but, surely, we are not bound, or even warranted to copy their errors—to appropriate their “wood, hay and stubble!” The safe rule is that which the Spirit furnishes, speaking by the great Apostle, “Be ye followers of me, even as I am of Christ.” (1 Cor. xi. 1.)

IX. It has been supposed, and urged, that the

142 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

singing of the Psalms of Scripture, in a New Testament sense,—“with our hearts and minds full of the New Testament commentary,” is somehow a warrant for the making and using of hymns: and this upon the principle that “It cannot be wrong to express in words, in the worship of God, what it is right to conceive in thought.” It has also been stated, in this connexion, that “the most rigid advocates of an Old Testament Psalmody, first comment, and at the close of his commentary, the minister counsels the people to sing as he has expounded!” And it is added, “It comes to this, that we must choose between a prose commentary which can neither be remembered nor sung, and a metrical comment, which all may hold with their hands, and look upon with their eyes, and render vocal with their tongues.”

On this very singular argument for hymns, we remark, (1.) If we mistake not, the design of all comment is to ascertain and trace the true meaning of the scriptures—whether Old Testament, or New. (2.) We were not aware that the minister who expounds the word of God, imposes an obligation upon his hearers either to read or to sing the words of the Bible, “as he has expounded.” We had imagined that expositors, whether writing or speaking, were “helps” and not “lords of the faith” of the hearer. (3.) If the Psalms are cor-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 143

rectly expounded, the worshipper is aided in singing them “with the spirit and with the understanding:” if incorrectly, he is not only at liberty to reject the comment, but bound to do so. (4.) If this argument is worth anything for the purpose for which it is adduced, it is equally available to a much greater extent: for it might as well be said, that the hearer is bound to read his Bible—any part of it—with the minister’s comment in his mind and heart, as to sing a Psalm as it is expounded. (5.) It seems to be taken for granted here, that New Testament truth is not in the Psalm, but is merely put into the commentary; for certainly, if this truth be there already, it can do no harm, and may do much good, to have the fact clearly set forth, as we are about to sing. (6.) If it be right to fix, by a metrical version, prepared as a paraphrase and not a translation, the meaning of a Psalm, and use this instead of the Psalm itself, why not apply this rule to the whole Bible, and re-write it, in the form of a paraphrase, so that no comments will be needed, and then put this into the “hands” of the people as an infallible exposition? Hence, (7.) The concluding statement of this argument is inconsistent with true Protestantism; for it advocates this very thing—the substitution of our own words as a commentary for the words of the Bible itself, in the exercise of praise.

144 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

(8.) The whole argument, if it have any force at all, is valid only against explaining the Psalms, and, if so, against explaining any part of the Bible.

We now proceed,—

II. To adduce some arguments against the use of uninspired hymns in the Church’s worship, whether domestic, social, or public. It can hardly be necessary to remark, that we do not object to the expression of scripture truth in rhythmical forms. An author may make “Gospel Sonnets,” as well as “sermons.” The only question is, regarding the use of them in the worship of God. Against this we argue. And,

I. The praises of God were celebrated in song, for many centuries under the Old Testament economy, but only in inspired songs. We have already seen, in one of our quotations from the pen of Dr. Pressly, that the Church in the patriarchal age, seems, so far as we have any light at all upon this subject, to have conducted the worship of God without the use of song. Neither the Bible, nor tradition, gives any other evidence. That the poetical faculty was entirely wanting, is extremely improbable. Yet none ever attempted, until inspired of God, to provide songs to be used in religious exercises. Still more. In after ages, God was praised in song; but only in song as indited by the Holy Ghost. None ventured to obtrude their own

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 145

compositions upon the people of God as the matter of their praise. Hence, in times subsequent to David and Asaph, we find Hezekiah and Judah, in the great reformation accomplished in the reign of that good king, employing none other than the Psalms already furnished. (2 Chron. xxix. 30.) And so throughout the entire Old Testament dispensation. Poets there were, unquestionably; and yet, no Psalms or hymns were ever introduced into God’s worship except inspired Psalms and hymns: none at all, after the canon of Old Testament scripture had been completed. This is an instructive and admonitory fact; to be met only by the clearest and most unquestionable warrant in the New Testament: such a warrant as we have already seen cannot be adduced.

II. There is no authority by which we are, or can be called upon to sing uninspired hymns. It needs no argument to show that the poet himself cannot make this demand upon us. We may refuse to sing his songs, and do no dishonour to God. Nor can the minister by reading from his place such songs, impose the obligation upon his fellow-worshippers to sing them. His audience may sit in silence and decline to respond to his call, which they cannot do, without sin, if able to sing, when called upon to unite in praising God in the “Psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs” of the scriptures,

146 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

upon which he has impressed the sanction of his own authority, any more than they can refuse to read His word, or wait upon the ministry which he has appointed. We might have in our possession any hymn book, for half a century, unopened, confining ourselves to the Psalms of the Bible, and be guiltless before God: which we could not do if it had His authority and sanction as containing the matter in which He is to be praised in song. Nor has the Church any authority to make and enforce the reception and use of a hymn-book. For even in those churches in which hymn-books have been authorized in modern times—there was no such true church until of late—no scruples hinder the most severe criticisms upon the very hymns which have received the very highest sanction—criticisms affecting, not merely the poetry and the rhythm, but the very matter and entire character of the hymn.* And it is not impossible but that the whole book might be thus handled by various critics, each adducing objections against such songs as might offend his views or his tastes. Hence, we are compelled to conclude that even those who have no difficulty in conscience as to the use of uninspired compositions, are conscious that the church has not been commissioned to prepare a book of

_____

* Instances of this will be given in the sequel.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 147

hymns—that when the task has been undertaken, the book is still destitute of any authority that can claim its devout and conscientious reception and use.

But we go farther. If these hymns have no authorized place in God’s worship: if they are destitute of His high sanction, they can be regarded in no other light than as “will-worship:” that is, worship of man’s device, and, hence, not only unprofitable, but unacceptable; not only unacceptable, but offensive in God’s sight, and so to be most carefully eschewed Thus, as we have seen, in our history of Psalmody, our reforming fathers thought. They rejected, on this principle, all matter of praise in song, but that which they found prescribed and ordered of God.

III. The employment of human compositions in the worship of God, does, in fact, set aside, at least for the time, the Psalms of the Bible. The advocates of hymns are not entirely agreed as to the propriety of using the scripture Psalms at all. Some go so far as to deny them any rightful place in New Testament worship. The great majority, however, admit that they may be used, and that too, as a manual of praise, which He who is King in Zion, has provided and appointed. Hence, they are rather disposed, in most cases, to resent the imputation that they exclude God’s Psalms

148 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

from His own house, and assert that they claim no more than the right to sing other songs by times. On this we remark, (1.) That it suggests the inquiry, whether they allow to the Psalms of the Bible a place of higher authority, than they do to their own writings? Do they sing them because they are God’s, and appointed by Him, or solely on the ground that they are selected by the worshipper for this purpose—or, it may be, allowed by church authority? If they can sing, or omit to sing them, as they determine at the time, alternating them with “hymns,” it would appear to be quite clear that there can be no regard to God’s appointment at all; or, at least that that appointment is liable to be overruled, at any time, by the choice of the worshipper. This is the only fair conclusion from the premises; and yet we are far from affirming that all who thus act, do deliberately subject a divine appointment to the taste, or judgment, or caprice of the worshipper: but they act as if they did. (2.) Is it not evident—provided the Bible Psalms have a sanction which cannot be claimed for songs of man’s composing; that the use of these songs in God’s worship, at any given time, is derogatory to this authority and sanction? If the Most High has appointed the Psalms to be sung in His praise, and has fixed the seal of His appointment to no other hymns or songs,—and this we

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 149

have already shown—then, does it not follow that in mingling a hymn in our devotions, we do, for the time, set aside an appointment of God, and this on the ground, expressed or implied, that we have found something better; for this occasion at least? Should we use, five times out of six, the Psalms of the Bible, we would really exclude them from their appointed place by the substitution of something else for the sixth service of song: for, if these Psalms be provided for our use, as God’s ordained matter of praise, it is not merely when we choose to use them, that the command bears upon us, but all the time. (3.) The inevitable conclusion is, that to mingle mere human hymns with the “Psalms,” is nothing less than to exclude the latter from the position they are entitled, as given of God, to occupy—is to make a divine appointment to depend upon our own will. If we may set them aside for one time, we may, for the same reasons, and on no higher authority, set them aside entirely and forever.

IV. Hymns, such as we oppose, are sectarian. Every hymn-singing denomination has its own hymn book. There is a Methodist hymn book, a Baptist hymn book, a Congregational hymn book, or books, a Presbyterian hymn book, or books, a Cumberland Presbyterian hymn book, a Universalist hymn book, &c., &c. This is a kind of neces-

150 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

sity; acknowledged by high authority to be so. We refer to the Biblical Repertory, (vol. xviii. p. 505.) “The Psalmody of the Christian assembly has generally partaken largely of those characteristics of thought and expression, which arise from the circumstances of the people. In a divided state of the Church, when the different denominations are zealous for their respective forms of doctrine and worship, the lyric poetry becomes strongly argumentative and polemical; addresses men rather than God; and is employed to defend and inculcate theology, and to confirm the attachment of the people to their peculiar articles of faith. Hence each sect has its Psalmody. Both policy and conscience are deemed to require the hymns to coincide in sentiment throughout with the creed of the sect. And these doctrines are not only stated in poetical language, or language professedly poetical, and dwelt upon in a strain of devout meditation, but are frequently inculcated in a sort of metrical argument, and appeal to persons not supposed to believe them.”

In opposition to all this sectarian perversion of this part of God’s worship, the advocates of the exclusive use of the scripture Psalms hold large-minded and catholic views. That the church may become one in her visible organization, and in worship, some at least of their hymn books must

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 151

be sacrificed. They cannot all remain. Let them all be discarded, that the one and sufficient book of Psalms furnished by our Saviour himself, through the inspiring influences of His Spirit, may be alone made use of by all his people, in the holy exercise of praise. The coming unity of the church will abolish these uninspired hymn books, or, at least, exclude them from the sacred worship of God.

V. It has been found impracticable—especially in the more enlightened and orthodox denominations—to frame a hymn book universally acceptable, and of a permanent character. Change, change, change, has been written and re-written upon these efforts to get better songs for Christian worship than those of the Bible. We might here, very properly allude, once more, to the fact that every denomination has its peculiar system of hymns. Every new schism produces some change in the songs sung in religious exercises. Every new phase of doctrine; particularly when it puts on a visible form as the exciting cause and shibboleth of a new ecclesiastical organization, makes its appearance in the shape of new hymns: destined themselves to illustrate, in turn, the inherent—and we believe insuperable—difficulty in the way of securing entire unanimity. In this connexion, we present, as quoted by Mr. Somerville, some testi-

152 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

monies in regard to the estimation in which the majority of existing hymns is held by some, at least, who do not confine themselves to the use of Scripture Psalms. “A ‘Layman’ in the New York Independent, Feb. 23, 1854, says—‘We have some two thousand pieces, which are called Psalms, or Hymns. Perhaps two hundred of them may pass for odes or lyrics, suitable for singing. Fifty more might possibly be selected by an expert.’ The Boston Congregationalist, Feb. 15, 1853, has the following:—‘Professor B. B. Edwards believed that two or three hundred Psalms or Hymns would include all which are of sterling value for the sanctuary. Unquestionably he was right. The popular demand for new and more numerous hymns, it cannot be denied, arises in part from the wide dissatisfaction with a large number of those with which our hymn books are filled. Let us have fewer and choicer. Let them be truly sacred lyrics, and not feeble prose, measured and amputated to the proper length, and afterwards still further mangled, at the mercy of men who wonder that David, (or rather the Holy Ghost, who spake by him) ‘had not sufficient native sense to have composed his Psalms in proper metres, ready at once to be cantered through ‘De Fleury, or paced through State Street.’ The Glasgow Examiner for Sept. 18, 1852, thus remarks upon the ‘Hymn Book of

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 153

the U. P. Church,’ ‘The collection contains a great many beautiful effusions of sanctified genius, and not a few *very trashy productions.’”

The last hymn book of the Presbyterian Church (Old School) furnishes an example in proof of our statement, deserving of especial notice. This book is the result of a second and laborious attempt to prepare a proper hymn book. The first, which was compiled by a very able committee of the Assembly, and by the labours of a number of years, and which was long sung, was an acknowledged failure. The committee to whom was intrusted, in 1838, the task of revising it, pronounced in their report to the Assembly, the following judgment upon its demerits. “On a critical examination they found many hymns deficient in literary merit, some incorrect in doctrine, and many altogether unsuitable for the sanctuary as songs of praise, for want of suitable sentiments, although not incorrect in doctrine or deficient in literary merit.”*

But did this Committee, whose report and a new book, which they had compiled, were adopted in 1840, succeed any better in satisfying the whole body? The Biblical Repertory, conducted by the Professors of the Theological Seminary at Princeton, says, “We are free to confess that there are

_____

* Spirit of the Nineteenth Century, vol. ii. 582.

154 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

many things in the book laid before the Assembly which we think ought not to be there; hymns which we consider unsuitable for the worship of God. Some of them are mere sentimental effusions; some objectionable from the lightness of their measure, and others for their want of all poetic excellence.” Others agreed with the Repertory; and, just now, a spirit of dissatisfaction with their hymns begins to make itself manifest in influential quarters. The Southern Presbyterian, a paper connected with that denomination, referring to a difficulty which has arisen out of a late discovery that one hymn occurs twice in the book, says, “It is not enough to ‘remove duplicate hymns;’ those must be removed which are ‘unpoetical and lacking in lyrical merit.’ It thinks some of the hymns would do very well as ‘doctrinal treatises, spiritual maxims, practical lessons, didactic essays, doctrinal argumentations and defences, very sensible, but very sedate and angular moralizings in verse.’ Hence some of these ‘are neither read nor sung,’—not sung, because they are not fit for the purpose; and not read, because people do not now go to the hymn book when they feel like reading.’ And then proceeds thus: ‘But it may be asked, What harm do those pieces in the book? We reply, they encumber it; they are in the way when one is looking for hymns that are

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 155

hymns; they increase the price, whilst they add nothing to the value of the volume. We say nothing about the credit they do us, or fail to do us, as a denomination making some pretensions to taste in poetry, as in other things. This is a tender subject, and we do not wish to give offence. Wonder if Dr. Dewey had not been recently looking over some of these pieces when he asked with so pompous, triumphant emphasis, ‘What poem has Calvinism written?’”

A “greatly respected correspondent” of the Presbyterian,” of this city, and “who has given the subject,” we use the words of the editor, “much consideration,” thus writes of the hymnology of the times, making no exceptions in regard to any particular system: “Our hymnology is far enough from perfection. It has grave defects and blemishes. It needs emending and purging. It does not recognise and carry out, as a distinctive and controlling principle, this—that song, in the devotions of the family and the church, is truly a service of worship. It abounds with hymns addressed to creatures, sinners, saints, angels, the living and the dead. These hymns are not the impassioned cry of an adoring soul, calling on all things to praise and magnify the Lord. That is of the very essence of worship. But they reason, exhort, expostulate, promise, threaten; they moralize, solilo-

156 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

quize—sometimes eulogize. They sing to frail, sinful, dying men—not to the great and holy God. And as our books liberally provide such compositions, ministers and people use them, and have used them, until the sense of their incongruity with the idea and fact of worship is almost or quite effaced.”*

Nor is there universal acquiescence in the common opinion among such as use hymns, of the excellency of Watts’ “Imitations.” Dr. R. J. Breckenridge, a very competent judge, uses this language regarding it: “We freely confess that, for ourselves, we consider the Paraphrase of the Psalms, by Dr. Watts, the most defective part of our Psalmody; and only more and more marvel that such a miserable attempt should have acquired so much reputation.”† Dr. Junkin, who holds a high position in the same body—Old School Presbyterian,—thus characterizes this attempt to improve the Psalms of the Bible: “Dr. Watts has attempted, professedly, to improve upon the sentiment, the very matter, and the order, and by various omissions and additions, to fit the Psalms for Christian worship. This is unfair. If Pope had taken the same license with the poems of Homer, all the amateurs of Greek

_____

* S. D., in the Presbyterian, Nov. 20th, 1858.

† Spirit of the Nineteenth Century, vol. ii. 586.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 157

poetry in the world would have cried—shame on the presumptuous intruder! But it is a pious and zealous Christian divine who has taken this liberty with the songs of Zion, and almost the whole church acquiesces in it. What would we think of the French poet who, proposing to enrich French literature with a versification of the masterpiece of the English muse, should mangle and transpose the torn limbs of the Paradise Lost, until Milton himself might meet his first-born on the highway and not recognise it? And must this literary butchery be tolerated, because forsooth the victim is the inspired Psalmist? Why should the Heaven-taught bard be misrepresented thus? Let us rather have the songs of inspiration as God inspired them, and as nearly as is possible, and consistent with the laws of English versification. God’s order of thought is doubtless the best for his church. If any one think he can write better spiritual songs than the sweet singer of Israel, let him do it; but let him not dress the savoury meat which God hath prepared, until all the substance and savour are gone, and then present it to us as an imitation of David’s psalms.”*

Thus, the efforts of one of the most intelligent,

_____

* Lectures on the Prophecies, by George Junkin, D. D., pp. 231, 233.

158 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

and orthodox, and literary denominations in this country, have signally failed to procure a hymn book on whose merits they can agree.* They may try it again; but only to subject themselves to another mortifying failure. Among an ignorant people, or people of lax doctrinal views, it may be possible to secure a more general acquiescence in a volume of hymns. But this does not weaken—it rather strengthens the argument against hymns, derived from the apparent impossibility of attaining this in an educated and inquiring community.

Now, it is, certainly, not unreasonable that we should demand of these churches that they suit themselves in a book of hymns, before they ask us to join them in the singing of hymns. Indeed, with what propriety—we had almost said, with what decency—can they call upon us to unite with them in laying aside, even in part, if there were no more,

_____

* The new hymn book, we might have said above, was severely criticised on the floor of the Assembly, by which it was adopted. The chairman of the committee, somewhat disturbed by the unfavourable remarks upon the book, at length rose, and said, in substance, that he could sympathize with a good deal that had been said; for after revising each hymn, time after time,—in all, some six or seven times, he had thought it “the meanest book he had ever seen,”—adding, with a smile, “of course, I think better of it now.”

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 159

the Book of Psalms in a literal rendering, and in the adoption of hymns in our devotions, while they are so far from being satisfied with their new Psalmody? We have a Book which has stood the test of thousands of years; which, as we have seen, has instructed, edified and cheered hosts of the saints of God, living and dying; and with which we are fully satisfied.* It is rather too much to ask us to desert the stable position we now occupy, and to enter upon seas of uncertainty—to subject ourselves to similar harassing toils in the hitherto vain pursuit of unity and uniformity in singing hymns of human composition—particularly as we have in the Psalms which the Most High has graciously provided us, ample matter for the celebration of His praises.

VI. The advocacy of hymn-singing has led to the adoption and utterance of sentiments which strike at the very fundamentals of Christianity. We begin with Dr. Watts—who “Imitated” the Psalms of the Bible, and also, prepared many of the hymns now in use. This favourite poet and hymn-writer allowed himself to speak of the Psalms of Scripture in the following terms. “Some of them are almost opposite to the spirit of the gospel. Hence

_____

* Of the version used in our churches, we have something to say in the sequel.

160 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

it comes to pass, that when spiritual affections are excited within us, and our souls are raised a little above this earth, in the beginning of a psalm, we are checked on a sudden in our ascent towards heaven, by some expressions that are—fit only to be sung in the worldly sanctuary. When we are just entering into an evangelical frame—the very next line—which the clerk parcels out to us, hath something in it so extremely Jewish and cloudy, that it darkens our sight of God the Saviour. Thus by keeping too close to David in the house of God, the vail of Moses is thrown over our hearts. While we are kindling into divine love—some dreadful curse against men is proposed to our lips; as, Ps. lxix. 26–28; which is so contrary to the new commandment of loving our enemies. Some sentences of the Psalmist—may compose our spirits to seriousness, but we meet with a following line; that breaks off our song in the midst; our consciences are affrighted, lest we should speak a falsehood unto God; thus the powers of our souls are shocked on a sudden, and our spirits ruffled—it almost always spoils the devotion—Our lips speak nothing but the heart of David. Thus our hearts are, as it were, forbid the pursuit of the song; and then the harmony and the worship grow dull of necessity. Many ministers, and private Christians, have long groaned under this inconvenience—there

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 161

are a thousand lines in it—the book of Psalms—which were not made for a church in our days to assume as its own—I should rejoice to see—David converted into a Christian: there are many hundred verses in that book, (of Psalms) which a Christian cannot properly assume in singing—as Ps. lxviii. 13, 16, and lxxxiv. 3, 6,—Ps. lxix. 28, and Ps. cix. are so full of cursings, that they hardly become the tongue of a follower of the blessed Jesus. By that time they are fitted for Christian Psalmody—the composure can hardly be called inspired or divine—I could never persuade myself that the best way to raise a devout frame in plain Christians, was to bring a king or captain into our churches, and let him lead and dictate the worship in his own style of royalty, or in the language of a field of battle.”

Another, Dr. James Latta, uses such language as the following: “Whether these Psalms (mentioned, 1 Cor. xiv. 26,) were the effect of previous study and inspiration united, or of immediate suggestion, they were certainly not designed to inspire them—(the converts to the gospel) with veneration and respect for the Psalms of David. Any person—will quickly perceive how remote psalms and hymns, formed upon it (the orthodox Nicene creed)

_____

* Preface to the Imitation, Works, Vol. 7, p. 24.

162 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

would be from the—doctrine of the Old Testament. Nor do I think (the introduction of the Psalms of David into the Christian church) was very honourable to the cause of Christ. It deprived him of—divine honour—It deprived the asserters of his deity of all opportunity of bearing testimony to it in that part of their worship—It decided clearly in favour of that tenet of Arianism, that divine worship was to be paid only to the Father, and so had a direct tendency—to make heresy triumphant!”

The Psalms of the Bible, unchristian in spirit, in doctrine,—unfit for devotion, tend to make heretics, &c.! How different this estimate of the inspired Psalter, from the testimonies to its excellence which we have furnished so abundantly in our first chapter! And in whose service, but in that of the infidel, were Dr. Watts and Dr. Latta employed in putting forth such utterances against the Word of God?

Others have gone nearly as far, in other forms, in this work of undermining the faith of the church. They have virtually denied that the church—we speak in reference to her ordinary members—has, in her possession, the word of God at all: asserting, substantially, that there is no Bible, except in the

_____

* Discourse on Psalmody, pp. 42, 51, 77.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 163

original Greek and Hebrew. Mr. Black, against whose views on Psalmody, Dr. Anderson composed his able work, thus wrote some sixty or seventy years ago: “That there neither is nor can be any such thing as the inspired forms of the psalms in our language, unless an immediate revelation were made in that language: that it is not possible to retain the words and phrases of the original in any translation; that as a prophet is to speak in the language which is suggested to him, his words are justly called the words of the Holy Ghost; but that whenever a translation of that subject is made into any other language, the words of the language into which it is translated are no more the words of the Holy Ghost, than Greek is English.” We need not pause here to vindicate the claim of our Bibles as they are in the hands of the people of God, to be, indeed, the word of the living God. This is part of our controversy as Protestants with the Popish apostacy.

Another late writer, follows in the same strain; “The inspired songs of the Old Testament are written in Hebrew, and that has been a dead language to her ever since her (the Christian church’s,) first existence. She might translate these songs:—but the songs themselves she could not use.”*

_____

* Morton on Psalmody, p. 86.

164 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

And, of course,—provided this be true of the Psalms, it must be equally so of any portion of the Bible,—and so, in his zeal against the exclusive use of the Scripture Psalms, this writer would take away from the plain people of God, the entire Word of God: for, if the translated Psalms are not the Psalms, then the translated Sermon on the mount, is not the Sermon on the mount: if translated Psalms occupy, substantially, the same position as the ordinary compositions of men, which express scripture truth, then are the translated epistles of Paul, to be regarded in the same light as other sound gospel teaching,—as to the inspired Paul’s epistles, however, we cannot have them in our hands unless we can read Greek! These doctrines would deprive us of the Bible altogether: they would bereave the church of Christ of any authoritative standard of faith and duty, accessible to unlettered Christians, and would hand these over to the teachings and interpretations of the learned, and especially to the clergy. Thus the Papists teach, reason, and conclude.

But this is not all. While at one time the claims of the scriptures in the vulgar tongue are brought down to the level of ordinary compositions; at other times, the writings of men are exalted so as to bring them up to the height, at least, of the translated word of God. “And if the subject mat-

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 165

ter is inspired, that is enough; the song is an inspired song. For everybody knows, and the Doctor admits it, that the composition has its character from the subject matter. Every song, then, having for its subject matter inspired truth, is in reality an inspired song.”* If this be so, then, every sermon which faithfully presents gospel truth, every acceptable prayer as well as every sound hymn, must be “inspired” also! And, then, so far from having no English Bible, as at other times seems to be taught, we have any number of them—they are beyond computation!

Another, of higher name, teaches, indirectly, the same singular doctrine. He says, “Human composure, properly speaking, is something, whether in prose or verse, composed by men, the subject-matter of which is human views, wishes, concerns or interests. It is not proper to call a poem, the ground and substance of which is some doctrine, precept, promise, &c., in the word of God, a ‘human composure.’” Dr. Pressly, among other judicious comments upon this remarkable definition of the phrase “human composures,” says, “The reader will perceive that the author of the ‘Inquiry’ does not choose to appear before the public as the advocate of the use of songs of ‘human composure,’

_____

* Morton on Psalmody, p. 92.

166 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

in the worship of God. And to extricate himself from this difficulty, he has invented a convenient definition of the phrase, ‘human composure.’ He maintains that a composition, which has been written and arranged by man, provided the matter of it be taken from the Bible, is not a ‘human composure,’ but is ‘divine.’ And according to this definition, every evangelical sermon in the world is a ‘divine’ composition! and Dr. Ralston’s ‘Brief Explication of the Principal Prophecies of Daniel and John,’ is a ‘divine’ book! Against such an abuse of language, for the purpose of elevating the compositions of men to a level with the word of God, I enter my solemn protest.”* And well he may: for it is more than an “abuse of language”—it is false teaching, calculated to mar the faith of the church.

It is not our purpose to enter into any detailed refutation of these heretical assertions and doctrines. Every champion of the church’s common faith, as against infidels, papists and enthusiasts of all sorts who pretend to share in inspiration, is equally bound with us to engage in this work. These are errors which assail the very foundations. We hold them up as beacons to admonish the reader to beware of entering upon that course of

_____

* Pressly, p. 22.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 167

reasoning which has led to such conclusions as these, regarding the character and spirit of the Bible itself, and as to the fact whether we have any Bible at all, in any other tongue than the Hebrew and Greek, or even any Bible whatever, inspired in a way far transcending all that ordinary, even good, teaching can claim.

Nor do we design to affirm, or even insinuate, that all who favour the singing of hymns, have gone these lengths. An Alexander, or a Junkin, would revolt at teachings like these, as sincerely as we do. But to these results, not a few, as we have seen, have been driven in their advocacy of hymn-making and hymn-singing in the worship of God. Nor can we exempt from all blame, the denominations in behalf of whose practice in this matter of Psalmody these statements have been made: for we have yet to learn that these assertions and reasonings have been met by any such rebuke on their part, as they certainly deserve.

It is no hallowed cause in which men not deficient in sagacity have felt themselves constrained, somehow, by an inexorable logic to defend their views at such an expense. If hymns cannot be vindicated, without disparaging the translated word of God and its claim to hold, when faithfully rendered, an incomparably higher place than the compositions even of the most enlightened and experi-

168 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

enced Christians, their defence ought, by all means, to be abandoned.

VII. The introduction and the use of hymns, has been followed by the abandonment, to a very great extent, of congregational singing: and, even in domestic worship, there is, if we are not greatly mistaken, comparatively little use of sacred song. Hymns and “Imitations” of the Psalms have been, in a vast number of instances, the precursors of various appliances and arrangements in connexion with the musical services of the sanctuary; while these, again, have had the effect of closing the lips of the worshippers. So that, except in social meetings, we may safely assert, that in most denominations,* which favour the singing of uninspired songs, they often do not after all sing them, either in public or domestic worship! The great mass of the worshippers (?) in public service “sit mute”—to use an expression employed by a late writer respecting the Independent Churches of England,—while a few in the choir attend to this part of the services. Is not this, notoriously, the fact? too notorious to require any proof? And, not in this land, alone, but in others, although not everywhere to the same extent, the use of hymns has

_____

* The Methodist denominations do still, we believe, retain congregational singing.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 169

largely sent the entire “service of song” into some corner of the church edifice, committing it to a few, and these not always specially devout and solemn. In many congregations, the voice of a worshipper anywhere out of the choir-gallery, would be frowned upon as an unwarrantable interference with the artistic efforts of the select few! As to the devotions of the family, in this country at least, we are quite safe in asserting that they are generally conducted in hymn-singing denominations by reading the scriptures and praying alone; singing praise is omitted. Dr. J. W. Alexander says, “This part of the service (family singing) has fallen out of the practice of many households, and (strangely enough) extensively in those regions where scientific music has been most boastfully cultivated.” “It is a remarkable fact, that in those circles of the religious world which consider themselves the most accomplished, there are many families where sacred music receives no separate attention * * *; when the hour of family worship arrives, no hymn of praise ascends to God * ; our Christian daughters, practising for hours a day under great masters of singing, are sometimes unwilling to lend their aid even in the house of God.” “We believe that the revival of Psalmody in the house, would contribute to train voices for the sanctuary.” “It is mournful to think, that a service which was

170 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

so precious to our ancestors, and which they made sacrifices to enjoy, even when under the sword of persecution, should die out in many Christian families in these days of peace, when there is no lack of worldly rejoicings, ‘and the harp, and the viol, tabret, and pipe, and wine, are in their feasts.’” (Is. v. 12.*)

There are exceptions: but the fact is indisputable, that congregational singing, and singing in family worship have largely disappeared:† and a most singular fact it is. Claiming the right to sing anything they please—advocating a wide liberty of selection—boasting that they have found hymns—multitudes of them—more suitable for New Testament service of sacred song; they do probably—really sing nothing at all—in the public—it may be in the domestic worship of God! Having banished the “Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” which God has provided, adopting in their stead, either “Imitations” of them, or hymns, they have gone on to a practical disregard of the ordinance of praise itself! They neither sing the Psalms of the Bible, nor any other!

_____

* Dr. J. W. Alexander’s Thoughts on Family Worship, pp. 218, 224, 226, 230.

† Some efforts are making to revive congregational singing; but with only partial success.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 171

Not so the Psalm-singing churches. They retain congregational singing. In a very few instances, the choir principle may be adopted partially, but no where, we believe, can there be found a congregation which remits the exercise of praise to a few occupants of a gallery. And so of family worship. In Psalm-singing denominations, both in this country, and in Europe, the celebration of God’s praise in the songs of Zion, is one part of the exercises of family worship. On this we quote from Dr. Alexander: “The use of Psalmody in family worship we believe to have been almost universal (he might have said universal) in the Old Presbyterian Church of Scotland, as it has been laudably kept up till this day. That it tended, in a high degree, to increase the interest of all concerned in the service, and to promote Christian knowledge and sound piety, we cannot for a moment doubt.”* All this has now mainly departed from one class of churches, while it has remained in another. Is there not a very solemn lesson, both of instruction and admonition to be learned from this?

But why has singing praise, been dropped so extensively in connexion with the use of hymns? We suggest the following: (1.) The hymns lack *au-

_____

* Thoughts, &c., p. 222.

172 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

thority.* It is very difficult to make out the call of God in the case of any given hymn at a given time. Even admitting that it is a duty to sing praise, the question rises as to the call to this duty in the given case. We have no doubt at all that this radical defect in the entire system of hymns, has wrought, gradually, but effectively, to produce the state of things we now witness, and so many deplore. (2.) And, in part, arising from the same cause, the idea of worship has ceased to no inconsiderable extent to be attached to the singing of hymns. We here use the words, and support our statement by the authority, of the writer from whom we have already quoted: “Is the true character of this service that of worship? Probably few or none would, in form, deny it. Our hymn books, however, and the usage of many Christian ministers and people do deny it, in fact. At least they hold it as a mixed service, partly worship and partly not. They sing now to God, and now to creatures. They do this, not only in mere musical exercises and recreations when there is no profession of worship, but also when households encompass the domestic altar and the great congregation waits before God. As a divine ordinance, then, the service of song is one of worship. This is the view of the Bible, the doctrine of the Church, the usage of heaven. Like prayer, it is worship in its most

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 173

direct form. What then? This. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. No creature, man, or angel, may share this honour. It belongs exclusively to God. The conclusion is inevitable and urgent. It reaches our hymn books. It demands a material change in their character. They are not formed on this definite and prime principle. Sometimes, indeed, they agree with it, as often they violate it. Whatever their compilers thought sufficiently pious and lyrical seems to have been inserted without a controlling reference to its fitness for the specific purpose of worship. They abound, therefore, with meditations, invitations, exhortations, expostulations, soliloquies, and even dialogues. Here they sing to creatures, and there to God; thus practically teaching that the one is right and becoming as the other.”* (3.) The abandonment so largely of congregational singing, may be traced to that fondness for fine, scientific music, which has ever followed in the train of hymns, when used among a cultivated people. The associations of every day musical training and recreations, are readily transferred to the Sabbath, and the sanctuary. It is all the singing of songs: men’s songs. These may

_____

* S. D., in the Presbyterian, Nov. 27th, and Dec. 4th, 1858.

174 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

differ in their subject, but they are one in their origin. Hence, unlike those who use the word of God alone in singing his praise, there is no particular sense of incongruity in treating hymns as other songs are treated;—that is, made the mere vehicle of music, instead of employing music to deepen the impression of the sentiments uttered.

Whether we have traced the causes of this state of things accurately, or not, our facts remain. They deserve high consideration.

VIII. The use of hymns in religious exercises endangers the church’s purity: hymns may be used and have been, in diffusing errors and heresy. That the songs used by the church in her devotions have no feeble influence upon her faith, we have already affirmed. The fact is beyond question. The notion of sacredness becomes, in some cases, attached to them. Their constant use impresses them deeply upon the mind, and upon the heart. Hence, error incorporated in songs and sung in devotional exercises, occupies the most favourable position possible. Corrupters of the faith have ever understood this well; and, hence, have availed themselves of the instrumentality of songs as a most effective means of propagating their erroneous opinions. The Biblical Repertory, speaking of Bardesanes, says, “The Gnostic doctrines were poetic, and they were made popular, and widely extended

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 175

by the hymns and odes of this heretical poet, and those of his more distinguished son, Harmonius.”* Neander makes a similar statement regarding later generations: “and as sectaries and heretical parties often had recourse to church Psalmody to spread their own religious opinions, all those songs which had not been for a long time in use in the church, were particularly liable to suspicion.”† And, finally, the Repertory, alluding to the partisan use which the various factions of the church made of song, says, “Thus one of the most sacred portions of the worship of the church militant, in which it was designed to approximate most closely to the services of the church above, degenerated into the mere watch-word of a party, and the signal for strife and controversy.”

We can trace, not very distinctly, but with sufficient clearness for the purpose of admonition and warning, the hurtful workings of this agency even in the hands of those esteemed orthodox. The author of the “Voice of the Christian Life in Song,” thus speaks of the “Anonymous Greek Hymns:” “If any difference is apparent between the theology of these early hymns and that of St. Paul and St. Peter, it seems to be this: the incarnation and nativity of our Lord seem in the hymns to fix the at-

_____

* 1829, p. 530.

† His. ii. 318.

176 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

tention, rather than his death and resurrection. The language would perhaps be rather, ‘I was determined to know nothing among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him incarnate,’ than, ‘I was determined to know nothing among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.’ And in some measure the results of this difference may be traced. There is great rejoicing in Christ as the Restorer and Saviour, great adoration of Him as God manifest in the flesh, but perhaps less apprehensive of Him as the Redeemer of sinners, the Lamb of God, who has washed us from our sins in His own blood; and, therefore, less apprehension of the completeness of the redemption, and the blessed security of the believer, living or dead. From this tendency to make the manger, rather than the cross, the centre of the faith, probably arose those first misapprehensions of the position of the Virgin Mary, which afterwards spread so sadly.” A perusal of these “Hymns” shows clearly enough that this is no unfounded surmise. The same author, sets up a token of warning when speaking of the one hymn of Clement.”† Through all the images here so quaintly interwoven, like a stained window, of which the eye loses the design in the complication of colours, we may surely trace, as in quaint old

_____

* Voice, &c., pp. 27, 28.

† Clement lived at the close of the second century.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 177

letters on a scroll winding through all the mosaic of tints, ‘Christ in all.’ And could the earliest Christian hymn bear a nobler inscription? Yet, at the same time, we must remember that whilst the truth of the early Christian writings bears precious testimony to the Christian life of the times, their defects and mistakes bear, by contrast, no less valuable testimony to the inspiration of those earlier writings in which neither defect nor mistake is found.”*

Ephraem Syrus was the great “orthodox” hymn-writer of the fourth century. But who was Ephraem? A monk of Mesopotamia—perhaps a pious man, but a believer in relics, in prayers to and for the dead, and in a kind of purgatory. The writer from whom we have just quoted, thus speaks of him: “His learning might seem foolishness to children among us, and his theology may fall far short of the fulness and simplicity of the apostles’ teaching; but his heart seems to have been steeped in the Gospel histories; and, however dim might have been his explanation of the way of salvation, in those Gospels he surely found the Saviour, whom not having seen, he loved, and in whom he rejoiced with joy unspeakable and full of glory, receiving the end of his faith, even the salvation of his soul.”†

_____

* Voice, &c., pp. 45, 46.

† Ibid., pp. 54–55.

178 THE TRUE PSALMODY,

It may be said, however, that his hymns may have been orthodox—that his errors found no place in them—and, hence, that Ephraem neither diffused nor confirmed errors by his songs. We admit that his hymns contain much truth—and often beautifully and touchingly expressed. But they also contain more or less of his errors. The same writer—who admires him greatly—says again, “There is also a song of Ephraem’s about Paradise, the feet of whose mountains the highest waves of the Deluge could but touch and kiss, and reverently turn aside; where the sons of light tread the sea like Peter, and sail the ether on their chariots of cloud. And there is a hymn on the Resurrection, full of beautiful images, or rather visions; the gates of paradise opening of themselves to the just; the guardian angel striking his harp as he goes forth to meet them, when ‘the Bridegroom comes with songs of joy from the East, and the kingdom of death is made desolate, as the children of Adam rise from the dust, and soar to meet their Lord.’ There is mention also of a fire to be passed through ere paradise is reached (a fire not purgatorial, but testing,) the unjust being devoured by it, and the just gliding through untouched.”* We have here, with some idle fancies, an allusion to a “fire” after

_____

* Voice, &c., pp. 53–54,

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 179

death, that might soon, to say the least, become “purgatorial.” Finally, we present as we find it in the pages of Dr. M‘Master, a stanza, from this author, recommending prayer for the dead.

“Behold our brother is departed

From this abode of wo:

Let us pray in his departure

That his guide may be propitious.

Beatify him in the mansions above.

May his eyes behold thy grace.

Feed him with thy lambs.”*

These fanciful notions and erroneous views, thus incorporated with the hymns of so popular a writer, could not fail to work injury. True, the age of Ephraem was one already quite distinctly marked by the adoption of many of the errors which developed rapidly into the Papal apostacy. It is also true, that this monk was among the most orthodox men of his day and place—he belonged to the East; but all the worse, when even he introduced into his hymns errors of such a character. His general orthodoxy, and the acknowledged excellence of many of his compositions, would give countenance, currency and stability, to the false, the fanciful, and the visionary. Poison is all the more dangerous when mixed with wholesome viands.

When we come nearer to our own times—the

_____

* M‘Master, p. 49.

180 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

middle ages, and since,—we find the same agency used to establish errors. In the former, the monks sang, and others sang with them, of the “Virgin,” and of the literal “cross,” &c. “Long before error had been stereotyped into a creed, it has echoed from the hearts of the people in hymns. We need only study the sacred poetry of the middle ages to understand why the Reformation was needed. One painfully expressive fact meets us at the outset. Of Mone’s ‘Collection of the Latin Hymns of the Middle Ages,’ in three volumes, one is filled with hymns to God and the angels; one with hymns to the blessed Virgin Mary; and one with hymns to the saints.”* In our own day, what mean these confused sounds from the many denominational hymn books? Why such hymn books at all? The truth is, each embalms its peculiar views in song, and so endeavours to give them currency and permanence. Hence, nearly every fresh schism of any magnitude in these bodies, gives rise to some modifications in the “service of song.”

That there is danger attending the use of uninspired songs in our days, we infer from the actual character of a large number of the hymns now in use. And this we prefer to give in the language of a writer upon whom we have already made a

_____

* Voice, &c., p. 200.

HYMNS UNWARRANTED. 181

draught. “The Plymouth compiler, in his 264th hymn, offers to ‘Christian congregations,’ as a help to worship, this song to Mary:

‘Why is thy face so lit with smiles,

Mother of Jesus! Why?

And wherefore is thy beaming look

So fixed upon the sky,’ &c.

“Suppose we turn to the ‘Lyra Catholica,’ and from the same composition add another verse:

‘Why do not thy sweet hands detain

His feet upon their way?

O, why doth not the mother speak,

And bid her son to stay?’

“What! In our social and public worship sing to the Virgin Mary? That were downright Popery. Shades of Luther, Calvin, Knox! has it come to this? Were your great labours in vain? Take care, thou excited Protestant. People who live in glass houses must not throw stones. You do in the service of song, in the house of the Lord, just as the Papists do. Protestants and Papists alike sing to creatures. The only difference between them, in this matter, is not one of principle, but of taste. And here they have the advantage of us. They have a higher standard. They sing to the angels, to the apostles, to Mary, and the noble army of martyrs and confessors. We, on the contrary, excluding these, except now and then

182 THE TRUE PSALMODY.

the angels, sing to all sorts of inferior creatures, and especially to sinners. These last have a large place in our hymnology. They are, indeed, highly honoured. We may sing to them in our worship at pleasure, though they would crucify the Saviour afresh. But what a prodigious stir would there be in our churches, should we venture to sing such stanzas as the above, to Mary! For our part, we condemn both.”*

It may be said, that the most objectionable hymns are excluded from the devotions of the more evangelical churches. That may be; but none the less are they in the hands of many professing Christians, and in general circulation: claiming a status among the sacred songs of the age, and doing their part towards moulding its views.

If we would occupy safe ground, let us keep to the “Psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs” of the word of God. These are pure—in them, is no error. They will never contribute any thing to the, already sufficiently extended, influences that tend to mislead the minds and corrupt the hearts of sinful men.

In some of these arguments we may find reasons ample to vindicate the divine wisdom and goodness in linking the “service of song” in the house

_____

* S. D., in the Presbyterian, Dec. 11th, 1858.

PSALMS UNOBJECTIONABLE. 183

of God, with an inspired manual. To give license here to human ingenuity, hazards the interests of truth and purity; tends to confirm disunion; fosters a worldly taste and undue fondness for mere vocal or instrumental melody; inflicts upon the church the evil of an insatiate desire of novelty and change: and may even put an end, as it has already done so extensively, to the joint and hearty co-operation of “all the people” in the exercise and ordinance of praise.

NEXT